MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W58327320

[Fibrocartilaginous embolic myelopathy in dogs: a retrospective study].

2007· article· en· W58327320 on OpenAlexaff
Antoine Dunié‐Mérigot, Louis Huneault, Joane Parent

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Orthopedics and Neurology
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCegep de Saint Hyacinthe
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmbulatoryMyelopathyMedicineGrey matterSurgeryRadiologyWhite matterMagnetic resonance imagingSpinal cord
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The clinical aspects of 26 dogs suspected of fibrocartilaginous embolic myelopathy (FEM) were documented and compared to results from 2 studies published in the literature. The short-term recovery capacity of 15 of these patients was also evaluated during a 30 day period by giving a neurological score. We have observed, compared to other studies, a larger proportion of cervical localization (15.4%) as well as a larger variety of race sizes for FEM. We have established that, after 30 days, 67% of patients had improved and that 88% of non-ambulatory patients had regained their ambulatory capacity. Also, patients showing signs of grey matter lesions (inferior motor neuron--IMN) as well as those having white matter lesions (superior motor neuron--SMN) had shown signs of neurological progress. Therefore, we have observed that the recovery capacity of an animal suffering from FEM does not seem to be impacted by its initial ambulatory state, nor by its lesions to IMN or SMN, although the low number of cases does not allow us to positively confirm this situation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations5
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicVeterinary Orthopedics and NeurologyFrench-language works237,207