The impact of skin preparation method on electrocardiogram quality in horses.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Several skin preparation techniques are used in electrocardiogram (ECG) monitoring of horses. The objective of this study was to determine which methods produce the greatest signal quality using textile electrodes and standard silver/silver chloride (Ag/AgCl) electrodes. Animals and samples: Electrocardiogram data were collected using textile and Ag/AgCl electrodes simultaneously for 4 skin preparation techniques in 6 horses. Procedure: The effects of skin preparation (cleansing with isopropyl alcohol, with or without shaving the hair) and the effects of the application of a conductive gel were assessed using metrics of signal quality. Results: Shaving and cleansing with alcohol had no effect on signal quality for either electrode type. The Ag/AgCl electrodes contain a solid gel, and the application of additional gel did not affect signal quality. Data quality was significantly improved when gel was applied to textile electrodes. Furthermore, there was no difference in signal quality between electrode types when gel was used. Conclusion and clinical relevance: This study suggests that skin preparation by cleansing and/or shaving does not have a significant effect on equine ECG signal quality. When gel is used, textile electrodes are a practical alternative for Ag/AgCl electrodes, as they produce ECG recordings of the same quality.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".