Exploring dairy producer and veterinarian perceptions of barriers and motivators to adopting on-farm management practices for Johne's disease control in Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Motivating uptake of management change recommendations requires knowledge of the barriers and motivators influencing producer behavior. This study investigated dairy producers' and veterinarians' perceptions of the barriers and motivators influencing the adoption of Johne's disease (JD) control recommendations in Ontario, Canada. Eight focus groups, 6 with dairy producers and 2 with veterinarians, were conducted and thematically analyzed. Both producer and veterinarian groups identified physical resources (i.e., time, money, infrastructure) and producer mindset (i.e., perceived priority of JD, perceived practicality of JD control recommendations) as key barriers to adoption. Producers tended to prioritize JD control on their farm based on their lived experiences with JD and their view of the public's concern about JD. Many agreed that JD recommendations should focus on biosecurity more holistically and emphasize the broader health benefits of limiting calf exposure to many fecal-orally transmitted diseases. Producers also highlighted that some recommendations for on-farm change (i.e., keeping a closed herd, buying from low-risk herds) were unrealistic or too difficult to perform and often disrupted their habits or routine. In contrast, veterinarians suggested that most recommendations were practical and are routinely recommended. Participants suggested both extrinsic (i.e., incentives, premiums, penalties and regulations, and extension and communication) and intrinsic (i.e., pride and responsibility) methods for motivating producers. This study highlights the importance of producer mindset in on-farm change and offers insights into the attitudes and perceived barriers influencing on-farm change.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".