The Effectiveness of an Educational Intervention on Knowledge, Attitudes and Reported Practices on Antibiotic Use in Humans and Pigs: A Quasi-Experimental Study in Twelve Villages in Shandong Province, China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our aim was to evaluate the effectiveness of an intervention for residents in rural China on knowledge, attitudes and reported practices (KAP) on antibiotic use in humans and pigs. A quasi-experimental study was conducted in 12 villages in rural Shandong province, divided into intervention and control groups, covering a two-year period from July 2015 to June 2017. A package of health education-based interventions including training sessions, speakerphone messages, posters and handbooks for residents was developed and implemented over a one-year period to improve the use of antibiotics in humans and pigs. The intervention net effects were evaluated by Difference-in-Difference (DID) analysis based on responses to a questionnaire concerning KAP towards antibiotic use in humans and pigs. A total of 629 participants completed both baseline and post-trial questionnaires, including 127 participants with backyard pig farms. Significant improvements were found in KAP towards antibiotic use in humans, but changes related to antibiotic use for pigs were not significant. Participants who were in the intervention group (p < 0.001) were more likely to have improved their knowledge on antibiotic use in humans. Participants who had higher attitude scores were less likely to report self-medicating with stored antibiotics in the previous year (p < 0.001). Our results suggest that our health education-based intervention was effective in improving KAP on human antibiotic use, but it had little effect regarding antibiotic use for pigs.
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 | 0.004 | 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".