Bibliographic record
Abstract
Kenneth A. Johnson, MVSc, PhD, FACVSc, DACVS, DECVS The findings of some previous studies suggest that up to 50% of dogs diagnosed with unilateral cranial cruciate ligament rupture would sustain the same problem in the contralateral stifle within 2 years. However, the findings of a recent study of dogs older than 8 years at the time of diagnosis of unilateral cruciate rupture suggest that this risk was only 19%.[ 1 ] Also this risk decreased for Labrador Retrievers and Golden Retrievers as they become older. Being a retrospective study of medical records and radiology reports, this study has some limitations. The investigators did not personally evaluate all the radiographs or examine any of the dogs for follow-up. Nevertheless, these are interesting data, and likely to be good news for the owners of these older dogs. However, what is a bit unclear is the manner in which this information would influence the decision-making process of the owners of older dogs when they get the initial diagnosis of unilateral cruciate ligament rupture. Would they be less likely or more likely to proceed with surgery? Perhaps it would not make any difference to their intention to proceed with surgery. Publication History Article published online: 15 January 2024 © 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.005 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".