MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7018673856

An Economic Evaluation of Intervention Strategies for Porcine Epidemic Diarrhea

2015· dissertation· en· W7018673856 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Atrium (University of Guelph) · 2015
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Disease Management and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutbreakBiosecurityEconomic evaluationEconomic impact analysisCost–benefit analysisIntervention (counseling)Economic costDiseaseHerd immunity
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recent outbreak of PED in North America, including Ontario, highlighted the severe threat posed by this disease for the swine industry. In completely susceptible herds, there is no immunological protection in piglets to the PED virus so the mortality rate is initially very high for young pigs (almost 100%) as is the morbidity rate. However, the economic costs of a PED outbreak, including production losses and expenditures on PED-intervention strategies, remain poorly documented. A simulation model is constructed in this study to calculate the costs of a PED outbreak on an individual farrow-to-finish farm in Ontario and to estimate the reduction in these costs as compared to the expense associated with implementing alternative control and elimination practices. The results indicate that the benefits of all intervention strategies in controlling the PED outbreak, associated with the reduction in losses from the disease are greater than the costs of implementing the strategy. The most cost-effective strategy involves closing the herd and front-load gilt introduction along with average feedback effort and intensive efforts on biosecurity protocols. The net benefits to that strategy are $257,000 for a 700 sow farrow-to-finishing farm. The costs of PED are estimated to be approximately 20 per market hog.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.207

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Atrium (University of Guelph)Same topicAnimal Disease Management and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207