MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408800552 · doi:10.1017/s1466252325000015

A systematic review of disease control strategies in beef herds, part 1: preweaned calf mortality

2023· review· en· W4408800552 on OpenAlexaff
V. Sanguinetti, Kayla Strong, Samuel Agbese, Cindy L. Adams, John Campbell, Sylvia Checkley, Ellen de Jong, Heather Ganshorn, M. Claire Windeyer

Bibliographic record

VenueAnimal Health Research Reviews · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Disease Management and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHerdDisease controlDiseaseCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Veterinary medicineVirologyInternal medicineInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Calves sold at weaning are the main source of income for cow-calf operations, and their survival should be a priority. Given this, the effective use of management practices for pregnant dams and calves to prevent calf mortality is essential; however, decision-makers often do not have access to information about the effectiveness of many management practices. A systematic review was conducted to summarize the evidence of the effectiveness of biosecurity, vaccination, colostrum management, breeding and calving season management, and nutritional management practices for preventing preweaned beef calf mortality. The population of interest was preweaned beef calves from birth until at least 3 months of age. The outcome of interest was general preweaning calf mortality with stillbirths excluded. Eleven studies were deemed relevant. Ten were observational cross-sectional studies, and one was a randomized controlled trial (RCT). The practices that were statistically significantly associated with calf mortality were intervening with colostrum in case a calf had not nursed from its dam or was assisted at calving, timing and length of the calving season, and injecting selenium and vitamin E at birth. More well-executed RCTs and cohort studies are needed to provide evidence of effectiveness and help support implementation of recommended practices in herds.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.428
Threshold uncertainty score0.939

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.552
GPT teacher head0.533
Teacher spread0.019 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnimal Health Research ReviewsSame topicAnimal Disease Management and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207