Investigating compliance with cow comfort and mastitis control recommendations on mastitis outcomes in smallholder dairy farms in Central Kenya
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A randomized controlled trial was conducted in Kenya in 2020 with the objectives being to assess compliance of smallholder dairy farmers (SDF) with farm-specific mastitis and cow comfort recommendations, to determine factors associated with compliance, and to determine the impact of these recommendations in reducing cases of subclinical mastitis. A total of 114 SDFs (124 cows) were recruited into the study and randomly allocated into intervention (74 farms) and control (40 farms) groups during the first farm visit. Existing farm-level mastitis control and cow comfort strategies were assessed in both intervention and control farms. Cow parameters (e.g. udder hygiene) were observed or measured from individual cows. A California Mastitis Test (CMT) was done on all quarters and scored from 0 (negative) to 3 (strong positive). All quarters with a CMT score of 2 and 3 were treated with intramammary antibacterial cefapirin preparation according to the label (Cefalak®). Intervention farms received farm-specific mastitis and cow comfort recommendations at the end of the first visit. On the second farm visit, cow parameters were measured again, CMT was repeated on all quarters on all cows, and compliance with recommendations was assessed and given a percentage score. Control farms were then given their farm-specific recommendations. Regression models were utilized to assess associations with compliance and improvement in CMT scores between visits. Intervention farms received an average of 3.3 and 3.9 recommendations pertaining to mastitis control and cow comfort, respectively. Farms complied with an average of 2.8 and 2.1 mastitis and cow comfort recommendations, respectively, leading to an overall average compliance score of 63.2 % for all recommendations. On the first visit, CMT scores 1 and 2 were significantly higher in quarters among cows on the intervention than control farms. There was a significantly lower proportion of quarters with CMT scores 1 and 2 in the intervention group on the second visit than the first visit and no quarters with CMT score of 3. The principal farmer, type of recommendation and number of recommendations given were significantly associated with compliance to the recommendations. The principal farmer and their age group were significantly associated with quarter CMT scores improving between the first and second visits. Farm-specific mastitis and cow comfort recommendations can significantly reduce the number of cases of subclinical mastitis in SDFs and should thus be included in farmers' training. Farmers should be given a small number of recommendations at a time to enhance compliance. • On 27.3 % of farms (n = 30), the principal farmer was male while on 40.9 % of farms the principal farmer was female. • Of the 110 principal farmers, 60 were less than 50 years of age, and 43 were over 50, while 8 did not disclose their age. • The proportion of quarters with CMT 0 increased from 72.4 % to 89.4 % from visit 1 to visit 2 in the intervention group. • On a farm where the principal farmer was female, compliance with recommendations was close to twice as likely. • A minor recommendation had 23 times higher odds of compliance than a major recommendation.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".