MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407507370 · doi:10.3390/ani15040549

Retrospective Evaluation of Subpleural Consolidations Using Lung Ultrasound in 634 Dogs and 347 Cats

2025· article· en· W4407507370 on OpenAlexaff
Katarzyna Kraszewska, M. Gajewski, Søren Boysen, Natalia Buda

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimals · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicUltrasound in Clinical Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCATSUltrasoundMedicineLungRadiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Human literature describes vascular patterns in various types of lung consolidations; however, these changes have not been analyzed in dogs and cats. This retrospective analysis of medical records aimed to describe vascular patterns observed in the airless subpleural lung tissue of dogs and cats and to compare these patterns to various lung consolidations and clinical diagnoses according to parenchymal and vascular criteria described in human literature. Animals: This study included 347 cats and 634 dogs. Methods: This was a retrospective study encompassing medical records obtained between 2018 and 2023. Lung ultrasound was performed in dogs and cats and cases with different sonographically identified airless subpleural lung tissue were selected. Airless subpleural lung tissue was categorized into five types of consolidations: shred, nodule, wedge sign, mass, and tissue sign. Further classification was based on the parenchymal criteria, the presence or absence of bronchograms and the vascular patterns identified within these regions. Bronchograms were classified as air bronchograms (dynamic and/or static), fluid bronchograms, mixed fluid and air bronchograms, and/or absence of bronchograms. Vascular patterns were classified as tree-like, residual, chaotic, “vascular sign”, and whether they were continuous with and extended from the chest wall or not. Conclusions and Clinical Importance: It is possible to identify and characterize airless subpleural lung tissue in cats and dogs based on the parenchymal and vascular characteristics.

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)0.003
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 score0.124
Threshold uncertainty score0.332

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.358 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimalsSame topicUltrasound in Clinical ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207