Comparing Pharmacokinetics of Meloxicam When Administered With a Needle‐Free Injection Device Versus Needle‐And‐Syringe in Piglets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Meloxicam is a common analgesic for castration in pigs. While needle‐free technology is effective for swine vaccination, its implementation for administering meloxicam has not been fully explored. The objective of this study was to compare the pharmacokinetics (PK) of meloxicam administered via a commercial needle‐free injection device (NFID) and intramuscularly via needle‐and‐syringe (NS) in nursing piglets. Twenty‐six nursing piglets were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups receiving the same approved label dosage of 0.4 mg/kg of meloxicam. Plasma meloxicam concentrations were measured using liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry, and PK profiles were measured using non‐compartmental analysis. The results indicated C max , AUC 0–last , AUC 0–∞ , AUMC 0–last , AUMC 0–∞ , and MRT in the NFID group were all significantly lower compared with those of the NS group ( p < 0.05). No differences in T max , T 1/2 , and λ z were found between the two groups ( p > 0.05). The study concluded that further research is needed to determine the optimal NFID setting and the clinical efficacy when using NFID for injecting meloxicam in piglets.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".