MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388539275 · doi:10.1093/jas/skad281.593

PSX-29 Lidobands for Use in Lambs

2023· article· en· W4388539275 on OpenAlexaff
Brenda Ralston, Merle S. Olson, Nick Allan, Andrea Hanson, Joe Ross, Kendall Beaugrand, Crystal Schatz, Denis Nagel, Ann Hammad

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare and Venom Research
Canadian institutionsChinook Regional Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLidocaineMedicineStimulationGroup AGroup BAnesthesiaInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The purpose of this study was to evaluate in vivo release concentrations of lidocaine into scrotal neck tissues and tail tissues following the application of lidocaine-loaded elastrator bands (LLBs) at acute time points (0.5, 1, 2, 24, and 72 hours) and chronic time points (14, 21, 28, and 35 days). To correlate the reaction of an animal to peripheral variable nerve stimulation with scrotal tissue lidocaine concentration. To correlate cortisol and substance P concentrations in treated animals at baseline (time 0) and 24, 72, 14, 21, 28, and 35 days to a control group. Fifty lambs were divided into ten groups consisting of Acute Pain Groups: Group A: 5 intact males. After baseline body weights, blood samples, and electro-cutaneous responses were collected, animals were band-castrated and tail-docked via LLBs on day 0, time (T) = 0. At T = 0.5 hr, the band was removed, and an electro-cutaneous response was measured at the tissue at the band sites. Punch tissue biopsies (including skin and subcutaneous tissue) were collected from the areas in direct contact with the band at each site for a total of 4 biopsies per animal. Group B: repeat of group A with the band removed and animal tested at T = 1 hr, Group C: T = 2 hr, Group D: T = 24 hr, Group E: T = 72 hr, Chronic Pain Groups: Group F: T = 14 d, Group G: T = 21 d, Group H: T = 28 d, Group I: T = 35 d, Control Group: Group J: repeat of group A except animals were band castrated and tail-docking with control bands (i.e., no lidocaine) on day 0. Body weight was recorded at T = 0 and 14, 21, and 28 d. A blood sample was collected at T = 0, 24, 72 hr, then T = 8, 21, 28, and 35 d. LLBs yielded decreased stimulation scores by 1 hr (60 min) post-banding with the tails and by 2 hr (120 min) for the scrotums. There were no adverse events or device failures (i.e., band breakage or failure to castrate/ tail-dock) observed during this study. Lidocaine-infused bands hold promise for reducing pain associated with castration and tail docking in lambs.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.246
GPT teacher head0.496
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicHealthcare and Venom ResearchFrench-language works237,207