MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7072038565

Using quantitative methods to understand how dairy farmer wellbeing connects to farm management, barn design, technology, and animal welfare

2024· dissertation· en· W7072038565 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2024
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture and Farm Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDairy farmingMental healthBarnWelfareAgriculturePopulationAnimal welfarePsychological resilienceProductivityMilking
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The agricultural profession, particularly dairy farming, is known for its demanding nature, both physically and mentally. Dairy farmers encounter various challenges including long working hours, physical labour, financial pressures, and unpredictable weather conditions. My objective was to explore different farm management practices, farming factors, and the prevalence of mental and physical health issues among dairy farmers in Western Canada and Ontario. Statistical analyses included t-tests, ANOVA, and chi-squared tests to compare means with general population averages and to investigate associations between mental health scores and physical health outcomes with survey variables. The results of the survey indicated that farmers (n=115) scored significantly higher on perceived stress (P<0.001), anxiety (P<0.001), depression (P=0.04), and resilience scales (P<0.001) compared to the general population. The results also highlighted concerns regarding the physical health of dairy farmers, with the majority reporting work-related injuries and health issues. I identified significant differences when comparing mental and physical health with work-life balance, social environment and support, and specific dairy-related stressors. Farmers faced both personal and farming-related financial stressors. Surprisingly, health outcomes did not differ based on housing or milking system, management practices, farm responsibilities, or financial and transition planning variables. Therefore, dairy farmers appear to have similar well-being in different production systems, but farm finance, feed cost, weather, and workload constraints are major stressors. I then adopted a more holistic approach to cluster farmers based on their well-being and farm management. The analysis identified four distinct groups of dairy farmers based on their survey responses. It also emphasized the need for a deeper understanding of the unique challenges faced by individual farmers in their production systems. Without this understanding, there is a risk of developing intervention plans that are ineffective or inappropriate for the Canadian dairy industry. The typologies developed in this research offer a promising foundation for providing tailored support resources.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.102

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.226 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)Same topicAgriculture and Farm SafetyFrench-language works237,207