Frecuencia de neoplasias en cavidad oral de caninos y felinos, diagnosticadas histopatológicamente en el laboratorio de histología, embriología y patología veterinaria de la FMV- UNMSM (periodo 2007- 2013)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
--- The aim of this study is to determinate the frequency of neoplasms in the oral cavity in canines and felines, according to the histopathological protocols of the Histology, Embryology and Veterinary Pathology Laboratory of the Medicine Veterinary Faculty from the Mayor University of San Marcos. The reports with histopathological diagnosis of neoplasms in canines and felines were analyzed in the period between January 2007 and December 2013, gathering the information about breed, age, sex, anatomy location and the histopathological diagnosis. The frequency of oral neoplasms found was 8.1% (122/1508) of the total of neoplasms, in canines was 7.9 ± 1.3% (115/1454) and in felines was 13 ± 8.9% (7/54). The animals more affected were the purebred and the ones between six and ten years old in canines, and less than 5 years old in felines. The breeds of dogs with greater presentation were the Boxer (11%), the Retriever Labrador (9.2%) and the Rottweiller (7.3%). Males were more frequently affected than females in 61%. The most frequently location was the gingival (57%). In general, the benign neoplasms (28%) were less frequently than the malignant neoplasms(72%). In canines, the Rhabdomyosarcoma (26%), the squamous cell carcinomas (17%) and the melanoma (16%), were the malignant neoplasms more common and the fibromatous épuli (56%) the benign neoplasm most common. In felines, only malignant neoplasms were found, and the squamous cell carcinoma (43%) was the most common. Keywords: oral cavity, neoplasm, frequency, canines, felines
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".