MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408387710

Predictors and barriers for biosecurity uptake and risk understanding among Ontario horse owners.

2025· article· en· W4408387710 on OpenAlexaffabout
Juliet A. Germann, Terri L. O’Sullivan, Amy L. Greer, Kelsey L. Spence

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicVeterinary Practice and Education Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiosecurityHorseEnvironmental healthBusinessMedicineBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: This study aimed to describe implementation of biosecurity practices by Ontario horse owners and investigate whether biosecurity implementation was associated with horse-owner demographic characteristics and personality traits. Procedure: A cross-sectional questionnaire was administered to a convenience sample of horse owners in Ontario to collect data on demographics, personality traits, risk comprehension, and biosecurity practices. Hierarchical cluster analysis was used to identify clusters of participants with shared personality traits, and univariable associations between clusters and demographic and biosecurity variables were examined. Results: A total of 271 participants were included in the analysis. Participants were primarily female (86%), from 25 to 44 y old (57%), and engaged in leisure riding (64%). Facility-level biosecurity plans were reported to be in place by 59% of participants, with 47% indicating that vaccinations were required within those plans. Other biosecurity practices were reported to be used less often by participants; for example, boot washing (31%) and disinfecting hands (27%). Two clusters of participants were identified according to similarities in personality traits: Cluster 1, which was characterized by high extraversion scores; and Cluster 2, which was characterized by high neuroticism scores. Cluster 1 participants were more involved in competitions, sought information from other horse owners, and received disease outbreak news from veterinarians. Cluster 2 participants exhibited higher variability in biosecurity practices implemented. Conclusion: Biosecurity is variably implemented on Ontario equine facilities, which warrants the need for ongoing efforts to increase uptake at high-risk facilities. Recommendations include fostering collaboration, providing tailored support and resources, and improving communication channels. Clinical relevance: Demographic, personality, and other lifestyle traits influence horse owners' biosecurity behaviors. Equine veterinarians may benefit from considering these factors to ensure effective communication and implementation of biosecurity plans at equine facilities.

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)0.003
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 score0.347
Threshold uncertainty score0.699

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.186
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.203 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicVeterinary Practice and Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207