Public Health Campaign to Promote Hand Hygiene Before Meals in a College of Veterinary Medicine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Veterinary students can be exposed to environmental infectious agents in school that may include zoonotic pathogens. Encouraging effective hand hygiene can minimize the spread of zoonoses and promote public health and the One Health concept among veterinary students. The purpose of this study was to determine if a campaign could improve hand hygiene among veterinary students at extracurricular meetings serving meals. Nine Kansas State University College of Veterinary Medicine (KSU-CVM) extracurricular organizations participated in the study, sanitizer was provided at each meeting, and baseline hand-hygiene data were observed. A hand-hygiene opportunity was defined as any student observed to approach the buffet food line. Sanitizer use (yes/no) and gender (male/female) were recorded. Campaign interventions included a 3.5-minute educational video and a novel motivational poster. The video was presented to all first-year, second-year, and third-year veterinary students. Posters encouraging hand sanitization were displayed on doors and tables alongside sanitizers at each meeting. Observational hand-hygiene data were collected immediately after introduction of interventions and again 3 months later. Environmental sampling for presence of bacteria in and around meeting locations was also performed. Observed hand hygiene was lowest during baseline (11.0% ± 1.7), improved significantly post-intervention (48.8% ± 3.2), and remained improved at 3-month follow-up (33.5% ± 4.0). Females had higher probability of hand sanitizing (35.9% ± 2.2) than males (21.4% ± 2.4) (p<.01). Clostridium perfringens was isolated from 2/42 samples, and Salmonella spp. were isolated from 4/42 samples. A short-term public health campaign targeting veterinary students successfully improved hand hygiene before meals.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".