Use of transrectal transducers in abdominal ultrasonography of horses: A review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Abdominal ultrasonography is an important diagnostic tool in the evaluation of colic, yet primary care equine veterinary practitioners are often limited by availability and access to low‐frequency (2–5 MHz curvilinear array or sector) abdominal transducers. Use of high‐frequency (5–10 MHz linear array) transrectal transducers has not previously been compared with use of abdominal transducers for transcutaneous abdominal ultrasonography. One recent pilot study established that there was no significant difference in organ detection by the two transducers on the right side of the equine abdomen, but the stomach, liver and kidney on the left side were less likely to be detected using the transrectal transducer in healthy horses. A clinical study found that the transrectal transducer can be used successfully using the FLASH protocol in horses presenting with colic, with high‐quality images that detected abnormalities of the peritoneal fluid, small intestine and large intestine. The transrectal transducer had decreased visualisation of the stomach and left kidney and was less likely to detect pathology surrounding these organs. This is the first series of studies to evaluate use of transrectal transducers in abdominal ultrasonography of the horse, a tool that is readily accessible to the field practitioner.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".