MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394417841 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.19968553

Prevalence and risk factors for urinary incontinence in bitches five years after ovariohysterectomy

2022· dataset· en· W4394417841 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
B. Leupolt, Cinzia Barbieri, Lêda Freitas de Jesus, Álan Gomes Pöppl

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2022
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Medicine and Surgery
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrinary incontinenceMedicineUrinary systemGynecologyUrologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Ovariohysterectomy (OHE) is the most performed elective surgery in veterinary medicine. Although this procedure brings benefits both to the animal and public health, acquired urinary incontinence is a possible complication resultant from it. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of urinary incontinence and evaluate size, breed, and time of surgery as risk factors in a population of spayed female dogs in the Hospital de Clínicas Veterinárias da Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, in the year of 2013, through the use of a multiple-choice screening instrument. Identified estimated prevalence was 11.27% and main risk factors were as follows: large size (OR = 7.12 IC95% = 1.42 - 35.67), Rottweiler breed (OR = 8.92; IC95% = 5.25 - 15.15), Pit-bull breed (OR = 4.14; IC95% = 2.19 - 7.83), and Labrador breed (OR = 2.73; IC95% = 1.53 - 4.87). Time of surgery was not considered a risk factor for urinary incontinence in this population (OR = 1.45; IC95% = 0.86 - 2.40). Even though most owners reported a small impact on their relationship with the animal, urinary incontinence hazard should be addressed before spaying.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicVeterinary Medicine and SurgeryFrench-language works237,207