MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405261481 · doi:10.3389/fvets.2024.1448216

Exploring bison producers' access to veterinary services in Ontario, Canada

2024· article· en· W4405261481 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Natassia H. Lambrou, Charlotte B. Winder, Kelsey L. Spence

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Veterinary Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicVeterinary Practice and Education Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
KeywordsLivestockFocus groupThematic analysisBusinessAgricultureAnimal welfareOne HealthAnimal healthWelfareMarketingIncentiveVeterinary medicineMedicineQualitative researchPublic healthGeographyNursingPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Access to veterinary services is integral for animals of all species. These services play a crucial role in maintaining their health and welfare and maintaining a healthy, safe, and sustainable food system. Research has consistently shown that rural communities face challenges accessing veterinary services, with livestock producers outlining several barriers including cost, inadequate infrastructure, and delays in receiving treatments. Research on bison producers' access to veterinary services is limited, prompting our investigation to address this gap in knowledge. This qualitative study aimed to describe Ontario bison producers' current access to veterinary services and identify how any barriers, as perceived by producers, might impact their herd health and management practices. Methods: Ontario bison producers were invited to participate in virtual focus groups to share their perspectives on their access to veterinary services. Audio from the focus groups was recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Results: Despite all participants indicating they had access to veterinary services, they also encountered obstacles and expressed concerns accessing and utilizing these services. Two overarching themes were identified: producers were concerned about the future stability and costs associated with bison farming, and they had a desire to improve bison-specific knowledge among veterinarians servicing their farms. Producers suggested several strategies to address these concerns, including improving collaborations with veterinary organizations, like the College of Veterinarians of Ontario, to increase veterinarians' exposure to bison, building stronger relationships between producers and their veterinarians, monetary incentives for established food animal veterinarians, and providing financial support to prospective food animal veterinarians. Discussion: The findings of this study demonstrate that although bison producers in our sample had access to veterinarians, they may not fully utilize the services or find their access entirely beneficial. Future research into the veterinarian perspective would allow for greater insights into these barriers, adding additional value and contributing to a more wholistic understanding of the topic.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.514

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0100.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.406
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.057 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Veterinary ScienceSame topicVeterinary Practice and Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207