MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386488905 · doi:10.1079/cabicomm-62-8171

Are integrated crop-livestock clinics an option for Kenyan smallholder farmers to address One Health issues?

2023· report· en· W4386488905 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Disease Management and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Agriculture of the People's Republic of ChinaAustralian Centre for International Agricultural ResearchAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of WarwickBritish Academy
KeywordsKenyaLivestockBusinessCropAgroforestryCrop managementAgricultural scienceAgricultural economicsGeographyEnvironmental scienceForestryEconomicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The majority of smallholder farmers in sub-Saharan Africa rely on both crops and animals for their livelihoods.However, the scarcity of farmer advisory services leaves them with insufficient knowledge about crop and animal health, as well as the wider health issues emanating from farming.There is a need for adapted, innovative services to meet the needs of smallholders.CABI's long-standing work with plant clinics sparked new ideas on how to better serve smallholder farmers by including animal advice in the clinics.This, in turn, revealed a potential to explore 'One Health benefits' of such an integrated service.Uganda began piloting crop-livestock clinics in 2021, and Kenya followed in 2022.Before launching the Kenyan pilot, a study was conducted to ascertain farmers': (i) awareness of 'One Health issues' related to crops and animals, (ii) information needs on crop and livestock farming, and (iii) perceptions on joint crop-livestock clinics as a new type of integrated farmer service.About 70% of the farmers, mainly from Trans-Nzoia and Machakos counties, were aware of some 'One Health issues', including mycotoxins such as aflatoxin as well as pesticide residues on food and fodder.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.102

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.001

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 head0.409
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.030 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAnimal Disease Management and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207