MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963978715 · doi:10.3168/jds.2018-15921

Biosecurity and herd health management practices on Canadian dairy farms

2019· article· en· W2963978715 on OpenAlexafffundabout
J. Denis-Robichaud, D.F. Kelton, C.A. Bauman, Herman W. Barkema, Greg Keefe, J. Dubuc

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Disease Management and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsCegep de Saint HyacintheUniversity of Prince Edward IslandUniversité de MontréalUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Guelph
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaCanadian Dairy CommissionDairy Farmers of Canada
KeywordsBiosecurityHerdIce calvingEnvironmental healthAgricultural scienceVeterinary medicineMedicineBiologyPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian dairy industry has created national standards to support the adoption of biosecurity practices and to reduce disease risks across the country. There is, however, very little information on the adoption of these practices. The present study aimed to describe the adoption of biosecurity practices on Canadian dairy farms shortly after the creation of the national standards and to identify demographic factors associated with practice adoption. In 2015, 2 questionnaires (phase 1 and 2) were administered to Canadian dairy farmers during an extensive cross-sectional study. Associations between adoption of biosecurity practices as well as associations between adoption of these practices and demographic variables were tested using multiple correspondence analysis. A total of 1,157 questionnaires were completed in phase 1, and a subsample of 368 respondents was selected using stratified random sampling to complete phase 2 during visits to the farms. There was a lack of investigation into general disease syndromes such as a high prevalence of abortion or an unexplained death (38 and 22% of respondents, respectively). Biosecurity measures within herds and between herds to minimize the spread of infection were not widely adopted (e.g., 27% of the respondents never housed sick or lame animals in their calving pen, 41% had closed herds, and 25 and 48% of the open herds had no strategy for introducing new additions and reintroducing returning animals, respectively). Cleanliness of the cows before calving was always ensured by 29% of the respondents, and 27% of the respondents reported always sanitizing the calving pen after each calving. Less than 15% of the respondents had measures in place to limit or control visitors coming on their farm. Moreover, less than half of the respondents reported requiring family members, employees, and visitors to wear farm-designated or clean boots and coveralls. From the multiple correspondence analysis, 2 dimensions were retained and were summarized as "animal movement, calving area, and visitor biosecurity" and "employee biosecurity." Geographical region, type of housing, and milk production were associated with the "employee biosecurity" dimension. The present study demonstrates that many important biosecurity practices are not implemented on Canadian dairy farms; therefore, efforts to promote the adoption of these practices will be necessary to improve biosecurity in dairy herds.

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 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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.310
Threshold uncertainty score0.612

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations50
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicAnimal Disease Management and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207