MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3132542769 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0247302

A knowledge, attitudes, and practices study on ticks and tick-borne diseases in cattle among farmers in a selected area of eastern Bhutan

2021· article· en· W3132542769 on OpenAlexafffund
Jamyang Namgyal, Tenzin Tenzin, Sylvia Checkley, Tim Lysyk, Sangay Rinchen, Ratna B. Gurung, Sithar Dorjee, Isabelle Couloigner, Susan C. Cork

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicVector-borne infectious diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersFaculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Calgary
KeywordsLivestockLivelihoodAgricultureTickLogistic regressionVeterinary medicineTick-borne diseaseEnvironmental healthSubsistence agricultureSocioeconomicsGeographyMedicineDemographyBiologyEcologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Livestock farming plays an important role in supporting the livelihood of resource-poor subsistence farmers in Bhutan. However, ticks and tick-borne diseases (TBDs) are one of the major constraints to livestock farming due to their negative effect on health and production. To date, no study has been conducted in Bhutan to assess farmers' knowledge, attitude, and practices (KAP) about ticks and TBDs in cattle, although such information is essential in ensuring the development and adoption of effective prevention and control measures. Therefore, a KAP survey was conducted among 246 cattle owners in the Samkhar sub-district of eastern Bhutan in June 2019, using a structured questionnaire. Based on our scoring criteria, 52% [95%CI: 45.5-58.4] had adequate knowledge about ticks as potential vectors of diseases. Logistic regression analysis showed that the individuals who practiced a stall-feeding system of cattle rearing were 2.8 times [OR = 2.8 (95%CI: 1.66-4.78)] more likely to have adequate knowledge than others. Sixty-eight percent [95%CI: 62.5-74.4] had a favorable attitude toward tick prevention and control programs. Men were 1.95 times [OR = 1.95 (95%CI: 1.09-3.55)] more likely to have a favorable attitude than women, and the individuals who practiced a stall-feeding system were 2.59 times [OR = 2.59 95%CI: 1.45-4.78)] more likely to have a favorable attitude than others, after adjusting for the effect of other variables in the model. Overall, only 38% [95%CI 32.5-45] of the respondents reported tick infestation as one of the most important animal health problems, but 100% reported using acaricides to control ticks in cattle. Despite a high level of acaricide usage, the level of knowledge was low among the farmers interviewed. Findings from this study underline the importance of considering identified knowledge gaps and initiating education efforts to improve the adoption of effective tick prevention and control measures among farmers.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.673

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations36
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicVector-borne infectious diseasesFrench-language works237,207