MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411991123 · doi:10.1016/j.jmccpl.2025.100474

Cardiology's best friend: Using naturally occurring disease in dogs to understand heart disease in humans

2025· review· en· W4411991123 on OpenAlexafffund
W. Glen Pyle

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Molecular and Cellular Cardiology Plus · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Conditions and Treatments
Canadian institutionsWomen's Health Research InstituteSaint John Regional HospitalB.C. Women's Hospital & Health Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDiseaseCardiologyInternal medicineMedicineHeart disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Heart diseases are a leading cause of death globally. Laboratory and preclinical animal models of disease have been critical in advancing our understanding of the mechanisms of pathology, creating diagnostic tools, and developing therapeutic interventions. However, fundamental biological dissimilarities between humans and rodents limits their usefulness in research, and the induction of disease in an otherwise healthy animal creates unrealistic conditions under which diseases are typically studied. Dogs are at high risk of acquiring and dying from several naturally occurring heart disorders that also affect people. The spontaneous nature of these conditions, along with highly similar cardiovascular systems, offers unique opportunities to investigate cardiovascular disease in a more relevant model for humans. This review focuses on three common cardiac conditions that impact humans and dogs: dilated cardiomyopathy, arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy, and mitral valve disease - comparing mechanisms of disease, diagnostics, and treatments, to identify strengths and present limitations of their utility. It is noted that the benefits of this research are bidirectional, with the potential to translate knowledge and clinical tools used in veterinary medicine to human patients, and vice versa.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.809
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Molecular and Cellular Cardiology PlusSame topicCardiovascular Conditions and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207