MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391881578 · doi:10.1177/10406387241229436

Canine distemper virus infection of vaccinal origin in a 14-week-old puppy

2024· article· en· W4391881578 on OpenAlexaffabout
Emily Rätsep, Davor Ojkić

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVirology and Viral Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCanine distemperLethargyPathologyMedicinePuppyTracheitisVirusEncephalitisVirologyBiologyInternal medicineBronchitis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

) was submitted to the Animal Health Laboratory, University of Guelph, Ontario for postmortem examination following a history of intermittent anorexia and lethargy progressing to pyrexia, pruritic skin rash, mucoid nasal discharge, decreased mentation, dysphagia, muscle twitches, and focal seizures. Gross examination revealed rhinitis and pulmonary edema. Histologically, there was fibrinonecrotizing bronchopneumonia, tracheitis, and neutrophilic and lymphohistiocytic rhinitis; rarely within the cortical gray and white matter of the brain were small clusters of glial cells, with rare individual neutrophils in the choroid plexus. Although canine distemper was suspected, none of the usual supportive histologic lesions of distinct syncytial cells, viral inclusion bodies, or demyelinating leukoencephalitis were observed. Lung and brain tissues were PCR-positive for canine distemper virus (CDV), and CDV was detected immunohistochemically in the brain. The agent from the PCR-positive sample from the brain was genotyped and was a 99.9% match to the CDV Rockborn strain, indicating that the disease agent in our case was vaccinal in origin. Our unusual case highlights the possibility of reversion to virulence in a modified-live virus vaccine, and the occurrence of a disease in the absence of a full complement of the usual and compatible histologic lesions.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.144
Threshold uncertainty score0.430

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Veterinary Diagnostic InvestigationSame topicVirology and Viral DiseasesFrench-language works237,207