Reliability Associated with the Measurement of Continuous Variables in Veterinary Medicine: What the Different Possible Indicators Tell, and How to Use and Report Them
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reliable indicators of health status (heart rate, rectal temperature, blood marker, etc.) are of cornerstone importance in the daily practice of veterinary medicine. The reliability of a measurement assesses the variability that is associated with the variable to be measured itself vs. other sources of variation (measurement device, person performing the measurement, etc.). Quantitative and continuous indicators are numerous in practice and the determination of their reliability is a complex issue. In the absence of a gold standard approach, several indicators of reliability have been described and can be used depending on several assumptions, study design, and type of measurement. The aim of this manuscript is, therefore, to determine the applicability of commonly described reliability indicators. After a description of the different sources of errors of a measurement, a review of the different indicators that are commonly used in the veterinary field as well as their applicability, limitations, and interpretations is performed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.209 | 0.482 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".