MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W81160862

UPDATE — MICROCHIP TECHNOLOGY IN CANADA

2002· article· en· W81160862 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Walt Ingwersen

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed Central · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFood Supply Chain Traceability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The CVMA has played an integral role in the evolution of the microchip marketplace in Canada. Through the facilitation of a collaborative and collective approach amongst user groups, compatibility problems between the various products, which continue to plague this technology within the United States, were avoided here. The user groups that participated in these discussions included the CVMA, the Canadian Federation of Humane Societies (CFHS), the Canadian Association of Animal Welfare Administrators (CAAWA), the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council (PIJAC), the Canadian Kennel Club (CKC), and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. With their collective endorsement, the Canadian User-Based Standard was developed and supported with a CVMA-mediated review process that allowed for recognition of those manufacturers/distributors that provided a product that not only met this standard, but stringent database support requirements as well. This provided user group members with a valuable resource to assist in selecting a viable manufacturer/distributor when sourcing this product. To date, only 3 companies have made application and passed this review process; they are: Anitech/PetNet located in Markham, Ontario; phone — 1-800-738-6385 AVID Canada located in Calgary, Alberta; phone — 1-800-338-1397 Microchips4Solutions/Pet ID located in Mitchell, Ontario — phone 1-877-738-4384 Microchips that adhere to the Canadian User-Based Standard represent the majority of microchips currently implanted within animals and are readily identified by the microchip readers from any of the aforementioned companies. As stated in prior articles, the Canadian User-Based Standard was designed as an interim step while the issue of technology compatibility was deliberated and resolved by the International Standards Organization, a global standards-setting organization located in Geneva, Switzerland. It has established a global standard for microchip technology that has been in place for 5 years now and was recently reaffirmed, as part of its mandatory 5-year period review process. It has been implemented successfully in most well-established microchip marketplaces outside North America. Recognizing this as the future of this technology, the CVMA elected to sunset its support of the Canadian User-Based Standard in favor of the ISO standard as of January 1, 2002 (see CVMA Council Supports International Standards Organization (ISO) Microchip Standards in Canada (Can Vet J 2001;42: 99–101.) However, this support was predicated on a significant upgrading of the reader network to ensure that there was no breach in the recovery network integrity and user confidence. To facilitate this transition, the CVMA has published several articles providing transition period strategies (see “Microchipping” — A technology in transition (Can Vet J 2000;41:570–572) and information on readers (see “Microchipping Update” — Transition period strategies (Can Vet J 2001;42:522–523.) critical to the successful implementation of the ISO standard into the Canadian microchip marketplace. While certain geographic areas have made progress in this regard, others have not, so that the required upgrade of the reader system to both forward (ISO) and backward (Canadian User-Based Standard) compatible readers is not uniform and far from complete across Canada. This is compounded by the reluctance of the microchip marketplace in the United Sates to adopt the ISO standard and develop transition period strategies. The reasons for this are multifactorial and not the intended focus of this article, but they do present a challenge that needs to be taken into consideration and addressed with the end consumer, especially considering the relative mobility of pet owners in Canada. While continued evolution of the marketplace towards adoption of the ISO standard is still the ultimate goal, it must be clear that this standard applies to both the microchip and the reader. This distinction is critical, as the approach to implementing these 2 components of this technology will be different during the transition period. While it is critical to support the implementation of forward and backward compatible readers ONLY during this transition period, until this is well advanced, the use of Canadian User-Based Standard microchips is not only acceptable but may be preferred in certain situations. Consider the following points when contemplating the implementation of an ISO standard-based system. The principal goal of all users should be to upgrade their existing readers to be both ISO (forward) and Canadian User-Based Standard (backward) compatible. The ideal time to do this is when purchasing new readers at the time of reader repair or maintenance. Do not settle for readers that will only read one form of this technology. Liaise with members of your community's recovery network (shelters, humane societies, etc.) to ensure that they too have upgraded their reader network. If this hasn't occurred in your area, it is premature to introduce ISO-standard microchips, and preference should be given to Canadian User-Based Standard microchips. Assess the pet owner's needs when deciding which is the best product to recommend. Consider the following: If the recovery network reader base has been upgraded to both forward and backward compatible readers and the pet owners do not intend to move or travel extensively with their pet, consider using an ISO-standard microchip. Remember, a true ISO-standard microchip has 15 numeric digits in its code with the first 3 identifying the manufacturer (these 3 digits should therefore, be consistent between microchips made by the same manufacturer). Regardless of the status of the recovery network in your area, if your clients plan to travel with their pet outside your area, especially to the United States, it is better to use a Canadian User-Based Standard microchip. If your client is planning to move, whether to another location in Canada or to the United States, it is safest to use a Canadian User-Based Standard microchip at this time. The exception to this would be if information gathered about the pet owner's new locale meets the criteria set out in 2A above. If your client is planning to move outside North America, principally to Europe or the Pacific Rim (Australia), an ISO standard microchip is quickly becoming mandatory in these locations. Other global areas are varied, and it would be best to contact the appropriate authorities of the country in question. The CVMA believes that adoption and movement towards complete integration of the ISO standard is sound, as it places the Canadian microchip marketplace in unity with the overall evolution of the global microchip marketplace and will provide us with the infrastructure to make full use of the many applications that this technology will offer us in the not to distant future. However, reader upgrade to ISO-compatible readers must precede actual ISO-standard microchip use. (by Dr. Walt Ingwersen, Chair, CVMA Microchip Advisory Committee, and Co-chair, WSAVA Microchip Committee; and Canadian Delegate to ISO TC23/SC19/WG3, Whitby, Ontario) Dr./Dr Walt Ingwersen

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.549
Threshold uncertainty score0.771

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.152
Teacher spread0.142 · 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.

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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed CentralSame topicFood Supply Chain TraceabilityFrench-language works237,207