English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

A rule-based expert system using CLIPS programming language was created to classify body cavity effusions as transudates, modified transudates, exudates, chylous, and hemorrhagic effusions. The diagnostic accuracy of the rule-based system was compared with that produced by 2 machine-learning methods: Rosetta, a rough sets algorithm and RIPPER, a rule-induction method. Results of 508 body cavity fluid analyses (canine, feline, equine) obtained from the University of California–Davis Veterinary Medical Teaching Hospital computerized patient database were used to test CLIPS and to test and train RIPPER and Rosetta. The CLIPS system, using 17 rules, achieved an accuracy of 93.5% compared with pathologist consensus diagnoses. Rosetta accurately classified 91% of effusions by using 5,479 rules. RIPPER achieved the greatest accuracy (95.5%) using only 10 rules. When the original rules of the CLIPS application were replaced with those of RIPPER, the accuracy rates were identical. These results suggest that both rule-based expert systems and machine-learning methods hold promise for the preliminary classification of body fluids in the clinical laboratory.

Comparative Analysis of Expert and Machine-Learning Methods for Classification of Body Cavity Effusions in Companion Animals