Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 190

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Sensitivity and specificity of infrared thermography in detection of subclinical mastitis in dairy cows

Open access
Polat, B., Colak, A., Cengiz, M., Yanmaz, L.E., Oral, H., Bastan, A., Kaya, S., Hayirli, A.·2010·Journal of Dairy Science

Abstract

The objectives of this experiment were to determine interrelationships among mastitis indicators and evaluate the subclinical mastitis detection ability of infrared thermography (IRT) in comparison with the California Mastitis Test (CMT). Somatic cell count (SCC), CMT, and udder skin surface temperature (USST) data were compiled from 62 Brown Swiss dairy cows (days in milk=117+/-51, milk yield=14.7+/-5.2 kg; mean +/- SD). The CORR, REG, and NLIN procedures of Statistical Analysis System (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC) were employed to attain interrelationships among mastitis indicators. The diagnostic merit of IRT as an indirect measure of subclinical mastitis was compared with CMT using the receiver operating characteristics curves. The udder skin surface temperature was positively correlated with the CMT score (r=0.86) and SCC (r=0.73). There was an exponential increase in SCC (SCC, x10(3) cells/mL=22.35 x e(1.31 x CMT score); R(2)=0.98) and a linear increase in USST (USST, degrees C=33.45+1.08 x CMT score; R(2)=0.75) as the CMT score increased. As SCC increased, USST increased logarithmically [USST, degrees C=28.72+0.49 x ln(SCC, x10(3) cells/mL); R(2)=0.72]. The USST for healthy quarters (SCC 400,000 cells/mL; n=135) (mean +/- SE; 33.45+/-0.09 vs. 35.80+/-0.08 degrees C). The sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 95.6, 93.6, 14.97, 0.05, 95.0, and 93.6, respectively, for IRT and 88.9, 98.9, 83.56, 0.11, 99.2, and 86.1, respectively, for CMT. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve for IRT and CMT was not different. In conclusion, as a noninvasive and quick tool, IRT can be employed for screening subclinical mastitis via measuring USST, with a high predictive diagnostic ability similar to CMT when microbiological culturing is unavailable. However, the reliability of IRT among cows with different characteristics and those living under various environmental conditions remains to be determined.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3168/jds.2009-2807

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 190

Metadata

Authors
Polat, B., Colak, A., Cengiz, M., Yanmaz, L. E., Oral, H., Bastan, A., Kaya, S., & Hayirli, A.
Venue
Journal of Dairy Science
Published
2010-08
Volume
93
Issue
8
Pages
3525-3532
ISSN
0022-0302 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2036005482
Cited by
190
References
0
FWCI
9.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Sensitivity and specificity of infrared thermography in detection of subclinical mastitis in dairy cows. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3168/jds.2009-2807
The paper
Polat, B., Colak, A., Cengiz, M., Yanmaz, L. E., Oral, H., Bastan, A., Kaya, S., & Hayirli, A. (2010). Sensitivity and specificity of infrared thermography in detection of subclinical mastitis in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2009-2807

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.