MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393953321 · doi:10.3168/jds.2023-24256

Biosecurity adoption in Québec dairy farms: Results from a risk assessment questionnaire analyzed using conventional and unsupervised artificial intelligence methods

2024· article· en· W4393953321 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Vitória R Lima-Campêlo, Marie-Ève Paradis, Juan Carlos Arango‐Sabogal, Nancy Beauregard, Jean‐Philippe Roy, Manon Racicot, Cécile Aenishaenslin, Simon Dufour

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dairy Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Disease Management and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsCegep de Saint HyacintheAssociation des Médecins Vétérinaires du QuébecUniversité de Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDairy Farmers of CanadaNovalaitMinistère de l'Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l'Alimentation
KeywordsBiosecurityDescriptive statisticsEnvironmental healthAgricultural scienceRisk assessmentVeterinary medicineBusinessBiotechnologyMedicineBiologyStatisticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study documents the current state of biosecurity on dairy farms in Québec following the implementation of a mandatory biosecurity risk evaluation that was part of the proAction accreditation program developed by Dairy Farmers of Canada. Using a cross-sectional design, 3,825 risk assessment questionnaires completed between 2018 and 2021 were extracted from Vigil-Vet database, which is a software used by veterinarians for conducting the proAction risk assessment. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the practices adopted by dairy producers. Additionally, multiple correspondence analysis was used to explore the association between the diseases of most concern and the adoption of biosecurity practices. Moreover, we used a hierarchical cluster analysis on principal components to identify distinct patterns of biosecurity practices among dairy producers. This analysis enabled the identification of typologies or clusters of farms based on the specific biosecurity practices they currently employ. The results of the descriptive statistics indicated that mastitis was the disease of most concern for most dairy farmers (40%). Moreover, given that only 10% of the 2,237 dairy farmers who acquired animals adhered to quarantine practices, there seems to be a need for improved implementation of biosecurity measures aimed at restricting the introduction of diseases when introducing new animals. Conversely, cleaning stalls and health equipment were adequately addressed by 95% and 86% of dairy producers, respectively. The multiple correspondence analysis indicated no significant association between the disease of most concern and the farm's biosecurity profile, except for respondents who identified digital dermatitis as their disease of most concern. Through the hierarchical cluster analysis, 3 clusters were identified among 3,581 farms: (1) Cluster 1 included farms with good management of sick animals; (2) Cluster 2 included farms with good management of young animals; and (3) Cluster 3 included farms with poor management of sick animals and young animals. Our study makes an important contribution by providing valuable insights into the biosecurity practices currently adopted on Québec dairy farms. It establishes a baseline for assessing progress in biosecurity practices adoption and serves as a reference point for future evaluations. In addition, these findings play a key role in monitoring the effectiveness of interventions aimed at improving biosecurity on dairy farms. By making use of this knowledge, stakeholders can make informed decisions that prioritize animal health, increase productivity, and ensure sustainability of the 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 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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.149

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dairy ScienceSame topicAnimal Disease Management and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207