MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2273492434 · doi:10.4314/ijbcs.v9i5.21

Impacts socio-économiques sur les cuniculteurs de la vaccination des lapins contre les coccidioses intestinales au Bénin

2016· article· fr· W2273492434 on OpenAlexaff
MT Kpodekon, Y. Djago, Dominique Licois

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Biological and Chemical Sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRabbits: Nutrition, Reproduction, Health
Canadian institutionsAgnico Eagle (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesVaccinationMedicinePhilosophyVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les coccidioses constituent l’une des maladies les plus meurtrières chez les lapins. Pour mieux contrôler cette affection, une prophylaxie vaccinale est mise au point. La réussite d’une telle innovation passe par la perception des cuniculteurs. Ainsi, la présente étude a été entreprise afin de déterminer les facteurs favorisant l’adoption par les éleveurs de la vaccination des lapins contre les coccidioses. Les enquêtes menées auprès des cuniculteurs ont révélé que 100% d’entre eux ont une opinion favorable du vaccin. De même, 83,3% des éleveurs ont affirmé que le vaccin était efficace. Par ailleurs, 80% des éleveurs ont déclaré connaître la coccidiose. Parmi ceux-ci, 62,5% avait bien décrit les signes cliniques de la coccidiose. L’étude économique a montré que la vaccination engendre un bénéfice net de 123,2 F CFA par lapin comparativement aux lapins non vaccinés. La vaccination s’avère efficace et est bien appréciée par les utilisateurs. Son adoption contribuera à améliorer les conditions de vie des cuniculteurs.© 2015 International Formulae Group. All rights reserved.Mots clés: Oryctolagus cuniculus, cuniculture, coccidies, prophylaxie, immunisation, adoptionEnglish Title: Socio-economic effects on the rabbit breeders of rabbit’s vaccination against intestinal coccidiosis in BeninEnglish AbstractCoccidiosis is recognized as being one of the major serious diseases in rabbit breeding. For a better control of this disease, a vaccination program is set up. The perception of the rabbit breeders determines the success of this innovation. Thus, this study was undertaken in order to determine the factors which favour the adoption of the rabbit vaccination against coccidiosis by the rabbit breeders. Survey performed on rabbit breeding revealed that 100% of the breeders included in the survey thought that vaccine is useful for the control of coccidiosis. An average of 83.3% of breeders has reported that the use of vaccine was effective to control coccidiosis. Likewise among rabbit breeders included in the study, an average of 80% has been reported to know coccidiosis. Among those breeders, an average of 62.6% was reported to know well clinical symptoms of coccidiosis. Economical study carried out on rabbit breeding showed that vaccine involves a net profit of 132.2 F CFA per vaccinated rabbit compared to non vaccinated rabbits. Vaccine turns out to an effective control of coccidiosis in rabbit and was well appreciated by the breeders. Its adoption will help improving rabbit breeders’ life.© 2015 International Formulae Group. All rights reserved.Keywords: Oryctolagus cuniculus, rabbit breeding, coccidia, prevention, immunization, adoption

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.245 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Biological and Chemical SciencesSame topicRabbits: Nutrition, Reproduction, HealthFrench-language works237,207