MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405624811 · doi:10.3168/jdsc.2024-0708

What can't colostrum do? Exploring the effects of supplementing colostrum after the first day of life: A narrative review

2024· article· en· W4405624811 on OpenAlexaff
D.L. Renaud, M.A. Steele

Bibliographic record

VenueJDS Communications · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal health and immunology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColostrumNarrative reviewNarrativeMedicinePsychologyImmunologyPhilosophyIntensive care medicineAntibodyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this narrative review is to explore the nontraditional uses of colostrum in dairy calves beyond the first and second feeding after birth. Colostrum is well established as a crucial component of early life management in dairy calves, providing essential antibodies for passive immunity. However, recent studies suggest that extending colostrum supplementation beyond the initial feedings, as well as incorporating transition milk, can yield benefits for calf health and development. Research indicates that such supplementation may lead to enhancements in gut development, improved health scores, and reduced incidence of diseases such as diarrhea and respiratory disease. Furthermore, recent findings have highlighted colostrum's potential to aid in the recovery from diarrhea and support calves during the weaning phase. Despite these findings, the exact mechanisms behind these benefits are still unclear, necessitating further research. Additionally, studies with larger sample sizes and varied housing conditions are needed to fully elucidate colostrum's benefits beyond the first day of life.

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)0.003
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJDS CommunicationsSame topicAnimal health and immunologyFrench-language works237,207