MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4404630781 · doi:10.1016/j.rvsc.2024.105469

Investigating compliance with cow comfort and mastitis control recommendations on mastitis outcomes in smallholder dairy farms in Central Kenya

2024· article· en· W4404630781 sur OpenAlexaff
Edward Kariuki Ng'ang'a, John VanLeeuwen, G.K. Gitau, Sharon L. McKenna, Luke C. Heider, Greg Keefe

Notice bibliographique

RevueResearch in Veterinary Science · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineAgricultural and Biological Sciences
ThématiqueMilk Quality and Mastitis in Dairy Cows
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Prince Edward Island
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMastitisCompliance (psychology)Environmental healthMedicineVeterinary medicinePsychology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

A randomized controlled trial was conducted in Kenya in 2020 with the objectives being to assess compliance of smallholder dairy farmers (SDF) with farm-specific mastitis and cow comfort recommendations, to determine factors associated with compliance, and to determine the impact of these recommendations in reducing cases of subclinical mastitis. A total of 114 SDFs (124 cows) were recruited into the study and randomly allocated into intervention (74 farms) and control (40 farms) groups during the first farm visit. Existing farm-level mastitis control and cow comfort strategies were assessed in both intervention and control farms. Cow parameters (e.g. udder hygiene) were observed or measured from individual cows. A California Mastitis Test (CMT) was done on all quarters and scored from 0 (negative) to 3 (strong positive). All quarters with a CMT score of 2 and 3 were treated with intramammary antibacterial cefapirin preparation according to the label (Cefalak®). Intervention farms received farm-specific mastitis and cow comfort recommendations at the end of the first visit. On the second farm visit, cow parameters were measured again, CMT was repeated on all quarters on all cows, and compliance with recommendations was assessed and given a percentage score. Control farms were then given their farm-specific recommendations. Regression models were utilized to assess associations with compliance and improvement in CMT scores between visits. Intervention farms received an average of 3.3 and 3.9 recommendations pertaining to mastitis control and cow comfort, respectively. Farms complied with an average of 2.8 and 2.1 mastitis and cow comfort recommendations, respectively, leading to an overall average compliance score of 63.2 % for all recommendations. On the first visit, CMT scores 1 and 2 were significantly higher in quarters among cows on the intervention than control farms. There was a significantly lower proportion of quarters with CMT scores 1 and 2 in the intervention group on the second visit than the first visit and no quarters with CMT score of 3. The principal farmer, type of recommendation and number of recommendations given were significantly associated with compliance to the recommendations. The principal farmer and their age group were significantly associated with quarter CMT scores improving between the first and second visits. Farm-specific mastitis and cow comfort recommendations can significantly reduce the number of cases of subclinical mastitis in SDFs and should thus be included in farmers' training. Farmers should be given a small number of recommendations at a time to enhance compliance. • On 27.3 % of farms (n = 30), the principal farmer was male while on 40.9 % of farms the principal farmer was female. • Of the 110 principal farmers, 60 were less than 50 years of age, and 43 were over 50, while 8 did not disclose their age. • The proportion of quarters with CMT 0 increased from 72.4 % to 89.4 % from visit 1 to visit 2 in the intervention group. • On a farm where the principal farmer was female, compliance with recommendations was close to twice as likely. • A minor recommendation had 23 times higher odds of compliance than a major recommendation.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,257
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,421

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,229
Tête enseignante GPT0,395
Écart entre enseignants0,166 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueResearch in Veterinary ScienceMême sujetMilk Quality and Mastitis in Dairy CowsTravaux en français237 207