Video capsule endoscopy findings in dogs with chronic enteropathy and in healthy dogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Video capsule endoscopy is a noninvasive technique for evaluation of the gastrointestinal tract. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the safety of using the video capsule ALICAM in dogs with chronic enteropathy (CE) >10 kg, and to compare macroscopic gastrointestinal morphology between CE dogs and healthy controls (HC). ANIMALS: Fifteen CE dogs and 15 similarly breed, age and body weight matched HC. METHODS: All dogs underwent a clinical work up including blood analyses, fecal samples, abdominal ultrasonographic examination, and blood pressure measurement. The dogs were withheld from food for 16 hours before and 8 hours after they PO received an ALICAM. All recordings were quality assessed, and blindly evaluated by 2 trained observers. RESULTS: The median age of CE dogs and HC was 3.3 (interquartile range [IQR] 2.5-5.9) years and 4.7 (IQR 3.3-5.6) years, respectively. The median body weight in the CE dogs and HC was 25.9 (IQR 20.6-30.9) kg, and 29 (IQR 16.2-30.5) kg, respectively. Complete recordings of the gastrointestinal tract were obtained from all dogs without complications. No significant differences were found between groups regarding number of abnormalities such as irregular mucosa, erythema, nonbleeding erosions, bleeding erosions, and dilated lacteals, as well as severity and extent of the abnormalities. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: The use of ALICAM for evaluation of the gastrointestinal tract in CE dogs and HC seems safe and feasible regarding gastrointestinal transit and macroscopic morphology assessment in dogs >10 kg. Abnormalities were found in similar proportions in CE dogs and HC.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".