Understanding the role of veterinarians in antimicrobial stewardship on Canadian dairy farms: A mixed-methods study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to describe the factors that influence dairy cattle veterinarians´ antimicrobial prescribing, their attitudes toward reducing antimicrobial use (AMU) in the dairy industry, awareness of antimicrobial resistance (AMR), and perceived barriers to improving antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) on Canadian dairy farms. We used quantitative and qualitative research methods to consider the complexity of the antimicrobial prescription decision-making process. We designed and distributed an online survey, followed by four online focus groups with practicing veterinarians. We used frequency tables and unconditional associations to analyze quantitative data, and thematic analysis to analyze qualitative data. In total, 107 participants from four Canadian provinces responded to the survey, and 26 veterinarians participated in the focus groups. Results from both studies were triangulated to draw our key findings. We found that 1) Veterinarians must weigh numerous intra-personal and contextual considerations that could be conflicting in their decision-making process for prescribing antimicrobials. 2) Although less experienced veterinarians showed greater awareness of AMR and motivation to improve AMS than more experienced veterinarians, they also reported feeling more pressure to adapt their prescribing practices to farmers' wishes than more experienced veterinarians. 3) Some veterinarians experienced conflict between prescribing antimicrobials to maintain animal health, productivity, and welfare, and AMS, which could result in blaming others for inappropriate antimicrobial use and reducing the opportunity to critically review their own prescribing practices. 4) There were strategies and barriers in common between veterinarians and farmers such as collaborative reviews of disease treatment protocols and improving preventive medicine on dairy farms. 5) The main barriers to reducing AMU on dairy farms reported by veterinarians were concerns about animal welfare and AMU on dairy farms without consultation with the veterinarian. Our results can inform the development of AMS programs in the Canadian dairy industry.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".