MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7053546015

Why Veterinarians (Do Not) Adhere to the Clinical Practice Streptococcus suis in Weaned Pigs Guideline: A Qualitative Study

2023· article· en· W7053546015 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUtrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Compatibility and Measurements
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStreptococcus suisContext (archaeology)GuidelineQualitative researchClinical PracticeQuarter (Canadian coin)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Netherlands has been very successful in the last decade in reducing antimicrobial use in animals. On about a quarter of farms, antimicrobial use in weaned pigs remains relatively high. As Streptococcus suis ( S. suis) infections are responsible for a high consumption of antimicrobials, a specific veterinary guideline to control S. suis was developed, but seemed to be poorly adopted by veterinarians. Guided by the theoretical domains framework, the aim of this study was to identify determinants influencing veterinarians' adherence to this guideline. We interviewed 13 pig veterinarians. Interviewees described multiple approaches to managing S. suis problems and adherence to the guideline. Mentioned determinants could be categorized into 12 theoretical domains. The following six domains were mentioned in all interviews: knowledge, skills, beliefs about capabilities, beliefs about consequences, social influences, and environmental context and resources. The insights derived from this study are relevant for understanding factors influencing veterinarians' adoption of scientific evidence and guidelines and can be used to develop evidence-based implementation strategies for veterinary guidelines.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.266 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUtrecht University Repository (Utrecht University)Same topicElectromagnetic Compatibility and MeasurementsFrench-language works237,207