Cattle farmer psychosocial profiles and their association with control strategies for bovine viral diarrhea.
Cattle farmer psychosocial profiles and their association with control strategies for bovine viral diarrhea.
复制标题
养牛户心理社会概况及其与牛病毒性腹泻控制策略的关联。
DOI：
10.3168/jds.2021-21386
复制
发表时间：
2022-04
影响因子：
3.5
通讯作者：
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
牛病毒性腹泻（BVD）在英国流行，造成重大经济损失。控制在很大程度上是个体农民自愿的，并且可能受到心理社会因素的影响，例如利他主义、信任以及与相关“其他人”（例如农民、兽医、政府和他们的奶牛）的心理接近度（感觉接近）。这些心理社会因素（心理和社会方面的因素）是人们如何做出与自身健康相关的决策的重要决定因素，其中许多因素尚未在农民传染病控制的背景下进行研究。使用能力、机会、动机行为 (COM-B) 框架对 475 名英国养牛户进行观察性调查，使用多种经过验证的措施对农民心理社会概况进行调查。使用潜在类别分析，根据 BVD 控制实践对农民进行聚类。农民被分为 5 个 BVD 控制行为类别，使用多项 Logistic 回归测试这些类别与社会心理和 COM-B 因素的关联，并以不采取任何措施作为基线类别。为自己和他人控制疾病的农民更有可能采取一些措施来控制 BVD（例如检测、接种疫苗）。不信任其他农民、具有较高心理能力（对如何控制疾病的知识和理解）以及具有较高身体机会（控制疾病的时间和金钱）的农民更有可能拥有封闭的、单独的畜群和测试。不信任其他农民的农民也更有可能对开放的牛群采取许多预防策略。具有高度自动动机（习惯和情绪）和反思动机（决策和目标）的农民更有可能单独或与其他对照结合进行疫苗接种和测试。与兽医心理接近（亲密感）的农民更有可能在开放的牛群中采取许多预防策略。与奶农心理接近程度较高而与肉牛养殖者心理接近程度较低的农民更有可能将牛群封闭、隔离并进行测试或接种疫苗并进行测试。那些对其他农民有很大信任并投资于他们的农民，而不是把一切都据为己有，更有可能谨慎地引入新的库存和测试。总之，农民心理社会因素与英国养牛户的 BVD 控制策略相关。与兽医的心理接近度是与主动 BVD 控制相关的一个新因素，并且比更广泛调查的信任更重要。这些发现凸显了兽医与农民之间密切关系的重要性，对于促进农民有效控制 BVD 非常重要，这对全国 BVD 控制和根除计划的成功具有重要意义。
Bovine viral diarrhea (BVD) is endemic in the United Kingdom and causes major economic losses. Control is largely voluntary for individual farmers and is likely to be influenced by psychosocial factors, such as altruism, trust, and psychological proximity (feeling close) to relevant “others,” such as farmers, veterinarians, the government, and their cows. These psychosocial factors (factors with both psychological and social aspects) are important determinants of how people make decisions related to their own health, many of which have not been studied in the context of infectious disease control by farmers. Farmer psychosocial profiles were investigated using multiple validated measures in an observational survey of 475 UK cattle farmers using the capability, opportunity, motivation-behavior (COM-B) framework. Farmers were clustered by their BVD control practices using latent class analysis. Farmers were split into 5 BVD control behavior classes, which were tested for associations with the psychosocial and COM-B factors using multinomial logistic regression, with doing nothing as the baseline class. Farmers who were controlling disease both for themselves and others were more likely to do something to control BVD (e.g., test, vaccinate). Farmers who did not trust other farmers, had high psychological capability (knowledge and understanding of how to control disease), and had high physical opportunity (time and money to control disease) were more likely to have a closed, separate herd and test. Farmers who did not trust other farmers were also more likely to undertake many prevention strategies with an open herd. Farmers with high automatic motivation (habits and emotions) and reflective motivation (decisions and goals) were more likely to vaccinate and test, alone or in combination with other controls. Farmers with high psychological proximity (feeling of closeness) to their veterinarian were more likely to undertake many prevention strategies in an open herd. Farmers with high psychological proximity to dairy farmers and low psychological proximity to beef farmers were more likely to keep their herd closed and separate and test or vaccinate and test. Farmers who had a lot of trust in other farmers and invested in them, rather than keeping everything for themselves, were more likely to be careful introducing new stock and test. In conclusion, farmer psychosocial factors were associated with strategies for BVD control in UK cattle farmers. Psychological proximity to veterinarians was a novel factor associated with proactive BVD control and was more important than the more extensively investigated trust. These findings highlight the importance of a close veterinarian-farmer relationship and are important for promoting effective BVD control by farmers, which has implications for successful nationwide BVD control and eradication schemes.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
4.8
作者：
Fagerland, Morten W.;Hosmer, David W.
通讯作者：
Hosmer, David W.
影响因子：
2.6
作者：
Doidge, Charlotte;Ferguson, Eamonn;Kaler, Jasmeet
通讯作者：
Kaler, Jasmeet
影响因子：
2.2
作者：
Charness, Gary;Gneezy, Uri;Halladay, Brianna
通讯作者：
Halladay, Brianna
影响因子：
7.6
作者：
ARON, A;ARON, EN;SMOLLAN, D
通讯作者：
SMOLLAN, D
DOI：
10.1098/rspb.2018.0116
发表时间：
2018-03-28
期刊：
Proceedings. Biological sciences
影响因子：
--
作者：
Bradley A;Lawrence C;Ferguson E
通讯作者：
Ferguson E