MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4402910041 · doi:10.3168/jds.2024-25186

Choosing the optimal combination of lung lobe evaluation during focused pulmonary ultrasonography in calves

2024· article· en· W4402910041 on OpenAlexaff
Gabriela Anteveli, Bárbara A. Alves, João Pedro Matiello, Guilherme Silva Lemos, C.S. Oliveira, D L Cruz, Rafael Romero Nicolino, Elias Jorge Facury Filho, Rodrigo Melo Meneses, A.Ú. Carvalho, Sébastien Buczinski, Tiago Facury Moreira

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFlow Measurement and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas GeraisSchool of Veterinary Medicine, Louisiana State UniversityUniversidade Federal de Minas GeraisConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
KeywordsUltrasonographyLobeMedicineRadiologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bovine respiratory disease (BRD) poses significant challenges on beef and dairy farms, affecting mortality rates, animal welfare, and production efficiency. Although pulmonary ultrasonography is highly sensitive and specific for monitoring lung lesions and diagnosing BRD, its practical application could be optimized by focusing on the most commonly affected lung lobes. This study first evaluated the efficacy of focused lung ultrasonography for diagnosing BRD in calves, examining individual lung lobes and their associations versus the extensive lung scanning under various disease prevalence scenarios. Then, the relationship between individual and combined clinical respiratory signs versus lung consolidation was analyzed. In a combined analysis, 193 Holstein calves from a longitudinal study and 112 Angus calves from a cross-sectional study underwent a total of 1,265 complete bilateral thoracic ultrasonographic evaluations from 1 to 6 mo of age. Then, the agreement and sensitivity (Se) of specific lung lobe combinations compared with the findings from total lung ultrasonography was assessed. The classification and regression tree (CART) algorithm was used to suggest an optimal examination sequence, and logistic regression was applied to associate specific clinical signs with the presence of lung consolidation, adjusting for breed and calf age. Findings revealed that the most sensitive areas are the cranial (kappa value [κ] = 0.867; Se = 84.7%) and caudal portion of the right cranial lobe (κ = 0.433; Se = 40.3%), the caudal portion (κ = 0.235; Se = 20.6%) of the left cranial lobe, and the middle lobe (κ = 0.25; Se = 22%). The optimal lobe combinations for focused lung ultrasonography were identified as the right cranial lobe paired with either the left cranial lobe or the middle lobe. Focused techniques achieved Se greater than 94% and maintained good agreement. These focused techniques were relatively robust to various true lung consolidation scenarios. The CART analysis recommended initiating examinations with the right cranial lobe, proceeding to the left cranial lobe, and concluding with the middle lobe. Although spontaneous cough was linked to pneumonia presence, reliance on a single clinical sign is not advised due to low Se (26.8%) and high specificity (85.4%); it should merely prompt further ultrasound assessment. In conclusion, focused lung ultrasonography, especially utilizing the right cranial lobe in conjunction with the left cranial lobe or the middle lobe, emerged as an effective strategy for focused pulmonary ultrasonography, preserving the accuracy of the results.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy Science→Same topicFlow Measurement and Analysis→French-language works237,207→