MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390342710 · doi:10.1111/jvp.13423

A dose characterization study evaluating the pharmacodynamics and safety of a concentrated alfaxalone solution (4%) as an intramuscular sedative in dogs

2023· article· en· W4390342710 on OpenAlexaff
Ting Michelle Angel Yvonne Hoon, Irving Kat, Kirby Pasloske, T. Farry, Wendy Goodwin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Veterinary Pharmacology and Therapeutics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Pharmacology and Anesthesia
Canadian institutionsZoetis (Canada)Merck Canada Inc. (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSedationSedativeMedicineAnesthesiaPharmacodynamicsCrossover studyPharmacokineticsPharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Alfaxalone is a commonly employed veterinary anaesthetic induction and sedation agent. A 4% w/v preserved, aqueous formulation of alfaxalone ‘RD0387’ (A4%) has recently been developed. To evaluate the sedative effects of A4%, three doses, 5 mg kg−1 (A5); 7.5 mg kg−1 (A7.5) and 10 mg kg−1 (A10) were administered intramuscularly into the epaxial musculature of six healthy adult mixed‐breed dogs in an experimental, randomized, blinded, crossover study. Sedation time variables, quality of sedation (including onset of sedation and recovery), physiological variables, response to cephalic vein catheterization and frequency of undesirable events were recorded. Continuous variables were analysed between treatments (one‐way ANOVA or restricted maximum likelihood modelling) and within treatments compared with baseline (Tukey's test). Categorical data were analysed between treatments (Kruskal‐Wallis' test) and within treatments from baseline (Dunn's test). Significance was set at p < .05. All dogs became sedated (laterally recumbent) and sedation onset was significantly faster in groups A7.5 (9.8 ± 5.3 min) and A10 (9.1 ± 5.6 min) compared to A5 (25.6 ± 16.1 min) (p = .033, p = .027, respectively). Duration of sedation was significantly longer in A10 (168.5 ± 70.6 min) and A7.5 (143.8 ± 58 min) compared to A5 (63.8 ± 28.2 min) (p = .005 and p = .003, respectively). Dogs in A10 had a superior quality of onset of sedation compared to A5 (p = .028). Sedation scores and quality of recovery from sedation were not significantly different between doses. Two dogs (2/6) in A5 were insufficiently sedated for cephalic catheterization. Ataxia was the most frequently observed undesirable event with an overall frequency of 78% (14/18) and 89% (16/18) during sedation onset and recovery, respectively. Overall, A4% administered IM in dogs at 7.5 and 10 mg kg−1 resulted in sufficient sedation for IV catheterization in dogs. To improve the speed and quality of the sedation, it is recommended that future research focuses on combining A4% with other sedative or analgesic drugs.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.323 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Veterinary Pharmacology and TherapeuticsSame topicVeterinary Pharmacology and AnesthesiaFrench-language works237,207