MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387063516 · doi:10.3168/jds.2023-23703

How can better calf care be realized on dairy farms? A qualitative interview study of veterinarians and farmers

2023· article· en· W4387063516 on OpenAlexaffabout
Devon J. Wilson, Julia Saraceni, S.M. Roche, Jessica A. Pempek, Gregory Habing, Kathryn L. Proudfoot, D.L. Renaud

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal health and immunology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward IslandUniversity of Guelph
FundersNational Institute of Food and AgricultureU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsBusinessPurchasingAgricultural scienceThematic analysisSustainabilityWelfareDairy farmingBiosecurityDairy industryDairy cattleQualitative researchMedicineMarketingAgricultureAnimal science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Improving health and welfare outcomes for replacement and surplus dairy calves is important for the sustainability of the dairy industry. Dairy farmers and veterinarians hold expertise in calf management and have valuable perspectives on how to practically motivate improvements. The objective of this study was to determine strategies that could improve the care calves receive on dairy farms from the perspective of dairy farmers and their herd veterinarians. Two veterinary clinics specializing in dairy practice in British Columbia, Canada, and 21 of their client dairy farms participated in the project. Following a meeting in which calf colostrum management was discussed between farmers and their herd veterinarian, participant interviews were conducted. Separate interviews were conducted for the farmers (n = 27 farmers from 21 farms) and their herd veterinarians (n = 7, with 1 to 5 farms that each vet worked with enrolled in the study) using tailored semi-structured question guides. Interviews (n = 42) were transcribed and coded following inductive thematic analysis methodology. The themes identified included strategies for farmers, veterinarians, and calf buyers, as well as contexts that influenced the dairy farmers' internal motivation to provide good calf care. Results indicated that farmers could optimize their calf management through fostering engagement of calf care personnel or by enlisting technology. Veterinarians could provide support to farms by being actively involved in calf monitoring, assisting in developing operating protocols, and setting goals, and especially by using farm-specific data to guide their management recommendations. Calf buyers could communicate with and provide accountability to farmers and improve their purchasing strategies to encourage farms to raise more vigorous surplus calves. Farmers' personal values, social networks, and relationships with different dairy industry stakeholders influenced their concern about the standards of their calf care practices. These findings provide guidance on how dairy farmers could achieve or be prompted to achieve improvements in their calf care practices.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.172
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicAnimal health and immunologyFrench-language works237,207