Herd health and production management visits on Canadian dairy cattle farms: Structure, goals, and topics discussed
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Regular veterinary visits to improve herd health and production management (HHPM) are important management components on many dairy cattle farms. These visits provide opportunities for constructive conversations between veterinarians and farmers and for shifting management from a reactionary approach to proactively optimizing health and welfare. However, little is known about the structure of HHPM farm visits and to what extent veterinarians provide assistance beyond purely technical services. Therefore, our aims in this cross-sectional study were to describe HHPM farm visit structure, determine which dairy-specific topics were discussed, and assess whether the focus of the visits aligned with farmers' priorities. Veterinary practitioners (n = 14) were recruited to record audio and video of regularly scheduled HHPM farm visits (n = 70) using an action camera attached to their chest or head. A questionnaire was distributed to farmers containing closed- and open-ended questions to assess their goals and perceptions related to farm management and HHPM farm visits. Descriptive statistics and negative binomial and Poisson regression models were used to study dairy-specific topics initiated by the farmer or veterinarian during various activities. A mean of 51% of the visit duration was dedicated to transrectal pregnancy and fertility diagnostics, and a considerable amount of time (30%) was spent on visit preparation, transitions between tasks, and leaving. A total of 488 discussions were initiated by either the veterinarian (55%) or the farmer (45%). Mean length of discussions was 2 min, and only 17% of the HHPM visit duration was spent discussing dairy-specific topics. Veterinarians initiated 62% of their discussions about herd issues, whereas farmer-initiated discussions revolved around herd health in 39% of the discussions. Discussion topics most frequently raised by participants included fertility, udder health, calf health and management, and transition diseases. Consistently, farmers' answers to a rank question regarding their main HHPM farm visit goals indicated that their priorities were to have transrectal pregnancy and fertility diagnostics performed and to improve herd fertility and general herd health. Answers to an open-ended question revealed that additional aims of many farmers were to receive information, have questions answered, and identify and discuss problems. A farmer's belief that HHPM farm visits were "absolutely" tailored toward his or her goals was positively associated with number of discussions during the visit and their conviction that they "always" voiced their wishes and needs to the veterinarian. Opportunities to broaden the focus of HHPM farm visits and improve communication between farmers and veterinarians should be identified and veterinarians should be trained accordingly, which would increase veterinarians' ability to add value during HHPM farm visits.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».