MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ANALYSIS OF ANTIHELMINTIC AGENTS FOR VETERINARY USE

2025· article· en· W4406859746 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
E. G. Kalugina, Olga Stolbova

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of KSAU · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicHelminth infection and control
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVeterinary medicineMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper presents the assortment trend and marketing analysis of veterinary medicinal products for the prevention and treatment of helminthic infestations in horses registered in the Russian Federation. Anthelmintics are antiparasitic drugs for the fight against helminths. The analysis of these drugs was carried out on the example of the veterinary pharmacies "Horsevet" and "Vetlek". According to the data obtained, it was established that the Russian market has a significant range of medicinal anthelmintic drugs (41 names) used for the prevention and treatment of helminth infections in horses. The domestic manufacturer occupies a leading position among the presented range of products – 34.1±1.87 %. On the market of veterinary drugs, there are imported anthelmintic drugs represented by such manufacturing countries as Belarus, Argentina, Brazil, Holland, Spain, Canada, etc. In the study of drugs by the number of pharmacologically active substances, it was found that monocomponent drugs account for 63.4±0.38 %, and multicomponent drugs – 36.6±0.85 %. The most common are soft dosage forms – 63.4±3.78 % (26 trade names in the form of flavored pastes and gels), which makes it easier to give the drug. Anthelmintic drugs in most cases are potent drugs, so most of them have a number of contraindications for use (85.4±4.95 %). 14.6±0.95 % of drugs have no contraindications. The use of all registered anthelmintic drugs for horses at the recommended doses does not cause changes in vital functions in the animal body.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.476
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.283 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of KSAUSame topicHelminth infection and controlFrench-language works237,207