MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387837046 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0293330

Endoparasites in dogs diagnosed at the Veterinary Teaching Hospital (VTH)-University of Bologna, combined with clinicopathological results. A long-term retrospective secondary data study

2023· article· en· W4387837046 on OpenAlexaff
Benedetto Morandi, Maria Chiara Sabetti, Maira Napoleoni, Ilaria Pascucci, Gionata Orlandi, Marco Pietra, John VanLeeuwen, Spencer J. Greenwood, Giovanni Poglayen, Roberta Galuppi

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicParasitic Infections and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVeterinary medicineToxocara canisEosinophiliaGiardiaPopulationBiologyCanisFecesHelminthsRetrospective cohort studyZoonosisMedicineInternal medicineImmunologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Humans and dogs commonly share the same domestic environment. Europe, and Italy specifically, have a substantial and growing dog population. Potentially zoonotic parasites may be harbored even by dogs receiving regular veterinary care. Thus, transmission of zoonotic or potentially zoonotic parasites to owners and their families should not be underestimated. Frequently, endoparasite infections occur as a subclinical infection and clinicopathological alterations have been documented including anemia, hypoalbuminemia, and eosinophilia. The aim of this large retrospective secondary data study was to analyze coprological endoparasite results and putative risk factors obtained from owned dogs, through a 9-year-period (2011-2019). Possible associations between diagnosed endoparasites and sex, age, seasonality, and year of examination were evaluated. Additionally, parasitological diagnoses were combined to complete blood count parameters and biochemical profiles, when available, to check for any possible hematological alteration from parasitism. A total of 1,972 dogs were evaluated for endoparasites using common fecal diagnostic tests over a 9-year period. The overall proportion of endoparasite-positive animals was 10%. The most common endoparasites detected were Cystoisospora spp. (3%), Toxocara canis (2.8%), Giardia duodenalis (1.6%), and Trichuris vulpis (1.2%). Of these parasites detected, Toxocara poses the greatest zoonotic risk, while Giardia species are considered to have a low potential to be zoonotic. There was no significant diagnostic trend across the years through the study period. Dogs were more frequently diagnosed endoparasite-positive when young and during cold seasons compared to the baselines of mature dogs and warm seasons. The clinicopathological profiles indicated that parasitized dogs had mild hematological alterations. The frequency of detected potentially zoonotic endoparasites in this study highlights that the risk should not be underestimated. Parasitic infection was found to be mostly dependent on age and season. Having this information may help clinicians to develop anthelmintic protocols to reduce the risk of transmission.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.058
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.226 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicParasitic Infections and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207