Brucellosis in Timor-Leste: Knowledge, attitudes, and practices among cattle farmers and animal health workers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Brucellosis affects both animals and humans. Our study investigates the knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) among cattle farmers and animal health workers in Timor-Leste regarding brucellosis as a cattle and zoonotic disease. METHODS: In 2023, we conducted a census of cattle-farming households across 5 aldeias (hamlets) in Timor-Leste. Animal health workers were also surveyed. The survey contained questions on demographics and KAP regarding brucellosis. Descriptive statistics and regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: We surveyed 253 cattle farmers and 22 animal health workers. Animal health workers were more likely to have heard of brucellosis than cattle farmers. Almost all cattle farmers were willing to wear gloves while handling birth material to reduce zoonotic exposure (95.3 %; 241/253) and support brucellosis cattle vaccination (95.7 %; 181/189), but fewer were willing to slaughter infected cattle (53.4 %; 101/189). Practices that could result in zoonotic transmission to farmers included slaughtering cattle (20.2 %, 51/253), handling aborted material (17.4 %; 44/253), consuming aborted material (5.5 %, 14/253), and drinking raw buffalo milk (6.3 %; 16/253). Household cattle management practices that could facilitate cattle-to-cattle transmission included communal grazing (92.6 %; 175/189), leaving cattle placenta in the field (88.0 %; 161/183), and leaving cattle aborted materials in the field (42.2 %; 27/64). CONCLUSION: The study adds to One Health research in Timor-Leste and improves understanding of community perspectives and practices that may increase the risk of brucellosis transmission. The results are important for informing the co-design of practical and locally adapted strategies with local communities to reduce the transmission of brucellosis in cattle and to humans.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".