MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6996775691

Surveillance of equine influenza virus and cause specific morbidity rate in young horses in Ontario

2006· dissertation· en· W6996775691 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Atrium (University of Guelph) · 2006
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory viral infections research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEquine influenzaOutbreakVirusEquine herpesvirus 1RhinovirusAntibodyRespiratory systemHaemolysis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nasopharyngeal swabs and acute and convalescent serum samples were collected from a total of 115 client-owned horses in twenty-three outbreaks of respiratory disease reported in Ontario (October 2003 to October 2005). Sera were paired and tested for antibody to equine influenza virus subtype 1 (AE1H7N7), equine influenza virus subtype 2 (AE2-H3N8), equine herpesvirus 1 (EHV1), equine herpesvirus 4 (EHV4), equine rhinovirus 1 (ERV1) and equine rhinovirus 2 (ERV2). Overall the cause specific morbidity rate of equine influenza virus in the respiratory outbreaks was 56.5% [determined by the single radial haemolysis test (SRH)]. The AE2-H3N8 was isolated from 15 horses in 5 outbreaks. Interestingly, four fold increase in antibody levels or presence of a high titre against ERV1 was observed in 11/23 outbreaks and ERV2 was observed in 2/4 outbreaks where AE2-H3N8 was diagnosed as the primary cause of disease using the SRH. In conclusion, AE2-H3N8 was found to be an important cause of equine respiratory disease. ERV1 and ERV2, which were present in 18/23 outbreaks, may represent an important component in equine respiratory disease in performance horses.

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 score0.718
Threshold uncertainty score0.568

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Atrium (University of Guelph)→Same topicRespiratory viral infections research→French-language works237,207→