↓ Skip to main content

Quantifying Preferences of Farmers and Veterinarians for National Animal Health Programs: The Example of Bovine Mastitis and Antimicrobial Usage in Switzerland

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Veterinary Science, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Quantifying Preferences of Farmers and Veterinarians for National Animal Health Programs: The Example of Bovine Mastitis and Antimicrobial Usage in Switzerland
Published in
Frontiers in Veterinary Science, June 2017
DOI 10.3389/fvets.2017.00082
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bart H. P. van den Borne, Felix J. S. van Soest, Martin Reist, Henk Hogeveen

Abstract

Bovine udder health in Switzerland is of a relatively high level. However, antimicrobial usage (AMU) seems high in comparison to other European countries also. A new udder health and AMU improvement program could improve this situation but it is uncertain whether there is support from the field. This study aimed to quantify preferences of dairy farmers and veterinarians for the start and design characteristics of a new national udder health and AMU improvement program in Switzerland. A total of 478 dairy farmers and 98 veterinarians completed an online questionnaire. Questions on their demographics and their mindset toward AMU were complemented with an adaptive choice-based conjoint interview, a novel conjoint analysis technique to quantify preferences of respondents for characteristics of a product for which multiple trade-off decisions must be made (here a bovine udder health and AMU improvement program). The conjoint analysis was followed by a multivariate multiple regression analysis to identify groups of respondents with different program design preferences. Logistic regression models were used to associate covariates with respondents' preference to start a new udder health and AMU improvement program. Most farmers (55%) and veterinarians (62%) were in favor of starting a new voluntary udder health and AMU improvement program, but the program design preferences agreed moderately between the two stakeholder groups. Farmers preferred an udder health and AMU improvement program that did not contain a penalty system for high AMU, was voluntary for all dairy herds, and aimed to simultaneously improve udder health and reduce AMU. Veterinarians preferred a program that had the veterinary organization and the government taking the lead in program design decision making, did not contain a penalty system for high AMU, and aimed to simultaneously improve udder health and reduce AMU. Differences between groups of farmers and veterinarians concerning their start preference were identified. Also, the magnitude of various program design preferences changed for farmers with different opinions toward AMU. The information obtained from this study may support the decision-making process and the communication to the field afterward, when discussing national strategies to improve udder health and AMU in Switzerland.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 2%
Switzerland 1 2%
Unknown 63 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 14%
Student > Bachelor 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Student > Master 5 8%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 18 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 15 23%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 22%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Engineering 3 5%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 20 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 June 2017.
All research outputs
#14,939,304
of 22,977,819 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#2,696
of 6,293 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#188,964
of 317,446 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#33
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,977,819 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,293 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,446 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.