MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2787068507 · doi:10.18103/mra.v6i2.1691

The Effects of AgrAbility on the Mental/Behavioral Health of Farmers and Ranchers with Functional Limitations: A Comparison Study

2018· article· en· W2787068507 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Research Archives · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Farm Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality of life (healthcare)Psychological interventionMental healthPsychologyClinical psychologyGerontologyMedicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: While research on the quality of life (QOL) levels of farmers and ranchers with disabilities is growing, research focused on interventions that improve their behavioral health is almost nonexistent. The AgrAbility Project, a USDA initiative, offers practical solutions to increase farmers and ranchers with disabilities’ QOL and independent living and working (ILW) levels. Aim of the Study: The objectives of the current study are threefold: first, to assess overall pretest-posttest changes in the ILW and QOL levels of AgrAbility participants; second, to focus on the behavioral health changes of AgrAbility participants; and third, to compare those changes in a group of AgrAbility participants to those of a no-treatment comparison group. Methods: AgrAbility treatment group participants (N = 273) included farmers and ranchers from 14 states with various disabilities who participated in AgrAbility and no-treatment comparison group participants (N = 100) from 17 states. Both groups completed ILW and McGill Quality of Life surveys. Results: Paired samples t-tests indicated that AgrAbility participants’ ILW and QOL improved with large or larger than typical effect sizes. Paired samples t tests indicated that AgrAbility participants’ behavioral health improved significantly with medium effect sizes.  Independent samples t tests reported significantly higher gain scores on all three behavioral health subscales for AgrAbility participants compared with the group of non-participants. Conclusions: These results show that participation in the AgrAbility Project was associated with significant improvements in behavioral health when compared to the no-treatment group which experienced no significant change in their behavioral health. The current study makes an initial contribution to the search for an evidence-based intervention for improving the physical and behavioral health of farmers and ranchers with functional limitations.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score0.719

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.270 · 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