MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405095293 · doi:10.3168/jds.2024-25543

Quantifying the impact of frequent diseases and syndromes on calf health using the opinions of producers and veterinarians: Toward dairy calf disability weights

2024· article· en· W4405095293 on OpenAlexaffabout
M. Villettaz Robichaud, J. Dubuc, D.E. Santschi, Jean‐Philippe Roy, Gilles Fecteau, Sébastien Buczinski

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Farm Safety
Canadian institutionsSte. Anne's HospitalUniversité de MontréalCegep de Saint Hyacinthe
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAmbulatoryDiseaseVeterinary medicineVisual analogue scaleFamily medicineInternal medicinePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The first objective of this study was to quantify the impact and disability weight (DW) of frequent diseases or syndromes of preweaning dairy calves using the perceptions of producers and veterinarians. The second objective was to compare the opinions of producers and veterinarians regarding the impact and DW of dairy calves' frequent diseases and syndromes. A survey was conducted to obtain demographic information and opinions of 39 dairy producers and 52 veterinarians on the impact of frequent disease and syndromes on calf health. Most of the producers (97.4%, 38/39) were clients of the ambulatory clinic at the Faculté de Médecine Vétérinaire de l'Université de Montréal in Saint-Hyacinthe, Québec, Canada. They were actively engaged in calf research projects. Québec veterinarians were contacted via email through their association. Additionally, veterinarians from the bovine ambulatory clinic and the bovine veterinary hospital at the Faculté de Médecine Vétérinaire de l'Université de Montréal were contacted directly via email. A visual analog scale, represented by a horizontal line ranging from 0 (no impact) to 10 (maximum impact; i.e., death or euthanasia), was used to estimate the impact of 9 frequent diseases or syndromes (diarrhea, dystocia, inadequate transfer of passive immunity, fracture, wound or abscess, arthritis, respiratory disease, umbilical infection, and congenital defect) on calf health following previously reported methods (using the most probable, and range of the perceived impact for each participant and disease). The DW values were obtained by converting the impact values to a probability density in a scale from 0 to 1 using BetaPERT methodology, a type of data distribution model. Average impact and DW were quantified for each frequent disease and syndrome. Average impact differed statistically across different diseases and syndromes. The highest average impacts were obtained for the presence of a fracture (6.49/10), arthritis (6.22/10), and congenital defects (6.03/10), whereas the lowest impact was observed for the presence of a wound or abscess (3.42/10). The opinions of producers and veterinarians were similar for most of the selected diseases and syndromes; however, statistical differences were observed for arthritis (producers = 5.13 vs. veterinarians = 6.88), umbilical infection (producers = 3.65 vs. veterinarians = 4.74), and dystocia (producers = 3.87 vs. veterinarians = 4.58). A strong correlation coefficient (0.72) was observed between the observed ranks of diseases and syndromes of producers and veterinarians. In conclusion, we quantified how frequent diseases and syndromes affect calf health. Producers and veterinarians mostly agreed on their impact. Estimating DW is a crucial first step in creating a health measure for dairy calves. Similar to humans, this metric will be important for health comparative analysis for producers, veterinarians, and industry.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.505
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 teacher head, 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicAgriculture and Farm SafetyFrench-language works237,207