Attitudes of Canadian dairy farmers toward a voluntary Johne's disease control program
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The success of Johne's disease (JD) control programs based on risk assessment (RA) depends on producers' compliance with suggested management practices. One objective of this study was to describe the perception of participating Canadian dairy farmers of the impact of JD, the RA process, and suggested management strategies. The second objective was to describe the cost of changes in management practices following the RA. A telephone survey was conducted with 238 dairy farmers in Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and British Columbia. The producers agreed to participate in this follow-up study after they had been enrolled in an RA-based voluntary JD control program and had tested their herd with the JD milk ELISA test in 2005 to 2007. The majority of farms had no JD test-positive cows and, although some producers thought they had experienced the economic impact of JD, many did not see JD as a current problem for their herd. The majority of producers enrolled in this program because they were concerned that Mycobacterium avium ssp. paratuberculosis could be perceived by consumers as a cause for Crohn's disease in humans, which could lead to altered purchasing behavior of milk and milk products. Fifty-two farm-specific recommendations had been made after the initial RA. Although the producers generally liked the program and found the recommendations reasonable and feasible, on average only 2 of 6 suggestions made specifically to them were implemented. The recommendation with the highest compliance was culling of JD test-positive cows. The main reasons for noncompliance were that the dairy producer did not believe a change of management practices was necessary or the available barn setting or space did not allow the change. Producers were generally uncomfortable estimating time and monetary expenses for management changes, but found that several suggested management practices actually saved time and money. In addition, 39% of the producers that implemented at least 1 recommendation thought their calf and herd health had improved subsequently. This indicates that the communication of associated benefits needs to be improved to increase the compliance of producers with recommended management practices.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».