A randomized control trial investigating the effectiveness of a commercial pneumonia vaccine (part I): Pre-weaned lambs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this controlled vaccine field trial was to determine the effectiveness of a commercial bacterin in increasing colostral immunity to reduce the risk of bacterial pneumonia in pre-weaned lambs in a commercial sheep operation. Pregnant ewes were randomly allocated to vaccination group (Ovipast™ Plus bacterin, n = 1807; unvaccinated, n = 1812). Ewe vaccination did not significantly (P > 0.05) improve lamb pneumonia treatment rates, crude or pneumonia specific mortality rates, or body weight gain . Interestingly, as birth weight increased in lambs from vaccinated ewes, they gained significantly more than lambs from unvaccinated ewes (P = 0.01). There was no difference in culture results from pneumonic lung samples for either Mannheimia haemolytica (P = 0.89) or Bibersteinia trehalosi (P = 1.00) between lambs from vaccinated and unvaccinated ewes. The results of this study suggest that there was no animal health and welfare benefit from vaccinating ewes with the Ovipast™ Plus bacterin prior to parturition to boost colostral immunity and improve health and growth in their lambs.
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 | 0.021 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".