↓ Skip to main content

Farmer and Veterinarian Attitudes towards the Bovine Tuberculosis Eradication Programme in Spain: What Is Going on in the Field?

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 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
Farmer and Veterinarian Attitudes towards the Bovine Tuberculosis Eradication Programme in Spain: What Is Going on in the Field?
Published in
Frontiers in Veterinary Science, November 2017
DOI 10.3389/fvets.2017.00202
Pubmed ID
Authors

Giovanna Ciaravino, Patricia Ibarra, Ester Casal, Sergi Lopez, Josep Espluga, Jordi Casal, Sebastian Napp, Alberto Allepuz

Abstract

The effectiveness of health interventions against bovine tuberculosis (bTB) is influenced by several "non-biological" factors that may hamper bTB detection and control. Although the engagement of stakeholders is a key factor for the eradication programme's success, social factors have been often ignored in the control programmes of animal diseases, especially in developed countries. In this study, we used a qualitative approach to investigate perceptions, opinions, attitudes, and beliefs of farmers, and veterinarians who may influence the effectiveness of the Spanish bTB eradication programme. The study was carried out in two phases. First, 13 key representatives of different groups involved in the programme were interviewed through exploratory interviews to identify most relevant themes circulating in the population. Interviews focused on strong and weak points of the programme; reasons for failure to achieve eradication; benefits of being disease free; future perspectives, and proposed changes to the programme. Based on these results, a thematic guide was developed and detailed information was gained through face-to-face in-depth interviews conducted on a purposive sample of 39 farmers and veterinarians. Data were analysed following an ethnographic methodology. Main results suggested that the bTB programme is perceived as a law enforcement duty without an adequate motivation of some stakeholders and a general feeling of distrust arose. The complexity of bTB epidemiology combined with gaps in knowledge and weak communication throughout stakeholders contributed to causing disbeliefs, which in turn generated different kinds of guesses and interpretations. Low reliability in the routine skin test for bTB screening was expressed and the level of confidence on test results interpretation was linked with skills and experience of public and private veterinarians in the field. Lack of training for farmers and pressure faced by veterinarians during field activities also emerged. Few benefits of being bTB free were perceived and comparative grievances referred to wildlife and other domestic reservoirs, sector-specific legislation for bullfighting farms, and the absence of specific health legislation for game hunting farms were reported. Understanding reasons for demotivation and scepticism may help institutions to ensure stakeholders' collaboration and increase the acceptability of control measures leading to an earlier achievement of eradication.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 69 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 22%
Student > Master 9 13%
Researcher 9 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 20 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 17 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 7%
Social Sciences 5 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 6%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 21 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 04 December 2017.
All research outputs
#5,242,963
of 24,904,819 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#953
of 7,697 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,026
of 450,105 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#17
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,904,819 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 78th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,697 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 450,105 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.