Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 338 items for :

  • "terminology" x
  • Refine by Access: All Content x
Clear All

international databases. 18 Few, if any, studies have examined template format reports that are not synoptic. 19 Indeed, most of the recent articles examining structured reporting in cytopathology focus on standardized terminology rather than standardized

Open access
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association

blinding status of persons involved in RCTs. Although this terminology was likely designed to provide a concise, standardized format for reporting blinding methodology, studies 8–10 have demonstrated considerable variability in how textbooks, authors, and

Full access
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association

to the Veterinary Comparative Oncology Group's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 1.1; Appendix ; Supplementary Appendix S3 , available at: avmajournals.avma.org/doi/suppl/10.2460/javma.259.4.385 ). 25 Dogs that experienced a

Full access
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association

assessment of currently available evidence regarding occurrence and causal factors; and to review the current use of terminology. Materials and Methods The study was conducted and reported in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for

Full access
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association

years ago. Anecdotally, application of these classification systems has become commonplace in contemporary veterinary oncology publications, and it is likely that their adoption has improved standards of AE reporting. Although standardized terminology

Full access
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association

—Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (VCOG-CTCAE v2) following investigational therapy in dogs and cats . Vet Comp Oncol. 2021 ; 19 ( 2 ): 311 – 352 . doi: 10.1111/vco.12677 33427378 13. Case JB , Ellison G . Single incision laparoscopic

Full access
in Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association

Abstract

Objective

To determine whether morphology of single-mineral urocystoliths and age, sex, or breed data could be applied to facilitate radiographic and clinical urocystolith mineral type prediction, respectively, in dogs.

Sample Population

Database of 2,041 dogs with pure mineral composition urocystoliths.

Procedure

All uroliths were characterized according to geologic descriptive terminology and by breed, sex, and age of dog at time of sample submission. Summary statistics were used to compare features with specific mineral types. Observed trends were analyzed for statistical relevance between observed and expected frequencies for age, sex, color, size, shape, and surface, using the null hypothesis that differences by urocystolith mineral type did not exist. On the basis of expected breed occurrence derived by equations, the null hypothesis that urocystolith occurrence paralleled canine breed popularity was tested.

Results

Urocystoliths > 10 mm in any dimension were > 92% likely to be magnesium ammonium phosphate hexahydrate (MAP). Smooth, blunt-edged or faceted, and pyramidal urocystoliths were usually MAP. Jackstone shapes were almost always silica. Botryoidal (grape-like clusters) urocystoliths were likely to be oxalates. Breeds with high relative likelihood of urocystoliths included: English Bulldog, Pekingese, Pug, Welsh Corgi, and West Highland White Terrier. Breeds with low relative likelihood of urocystolith production included: German Shepherd Dog, Shar-Pei, and German Shorthaired Pointer. About 94% of urocystoliths produced in females or spayed females were MAP, whereas males and neutered males produced a greater assortment.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance

For pure mineral composition urocystoliths, trends in mineral type among breeds and between sexes can be exploited clinically in the diagnosis and management of urolith-related disease. Size and shape, used in conjunction with age, breed, and sex, can facilitate pure urocystolith mineral type prediction. (Am J Vet Res 1998;59:379–387)

Free access
in American Journal of Veterinary Research