No abstract

The attitudes of farmers in relation to the importance of different people as information and opinion sources (InfS) for different phases of the decision-making process were studied in 91 Costa Rican dairy farmers. The InfS studied were: Family members, Other farmers, Technical advisors, Farm staff and Commercial agents, while the phases were: Problem detection, Seeking for problem solutions, Seeking for new practices and Seeking for opinion. A Multidimensional Preference Analysis (MDPREF) was used to obtain a two-dimensional map of preference of the farmers. A factor analysis was used to define new variables representing the farmers' predilection towards the InfS. A canonical correlation analysis was performed to find-out simple and canonical correlation between farmers'/farms' characteristics and the InfS preferences. Informational profiles in the population were defined through a Cluster Analysis. The MDPREF suggests that Family members and Technical advisors were the most preferred InfS. However their relative importance changed throughout the phases. Farm staff were rated in third place and their role became more important in the 'Problem detection' phase. Other farmers and Commercial agents were, in general, the less preferred information sources. The former became slightly more important in the 'Seeking for new practices' phase. The canonical correlation analysis found three low-medium correlations between the farmers'/farms' characteristics and the InfS factors. These correlations showed that the farmers' age, educational level and dedication and the farms' characteristics of area, herd size and distance to population centres had significant influence on the preference of the farmers towards different information sources. The cluster analysis found nine groups of similar farmers according to their preferences towards informational sources. Some implications mainly for extension activities are also stated and discussed. The importance of different informational sources slightly change throughout the decision-making steps, the family and farm staff being the most preferred information sources. #

This study evaluated the magnitude and distribution of acute gastrointestinal illness (GI) in Gálvez, Argentina, and assessed the outcome of a seven-day versus 30-day recall period in survey methodology. A cross-sectional population survey, with either a seven-day or a 30-day retrospective recall period, was conducted through door-to-door visits to randomly-selected residents during the ‘high’ and the ‘low’ seasons of GI in the community. Comparisons were made between the annual incidence rates obtained using the seven-day and the 30-day recall period. Using the 30-day recall period, the mean annual incidence rates was 0.43 (low season of GI) and 0.49 (high season of GI) episodes per person-year. Using the seven-day recall period, the mean annual incidence rate was 0.76 (low season of GI) and 2.66 (high season of GI) episodes per person-year. This study highlights the significant burden of GI in a South American community and confirms the importance of seasonality when investigating GI in the population. The findings suggest that a longer recall period may underestimate the burden of GI in retrospective population surveys of GI.

The purpose of this study was to determine the magnitude and distribution of acute gastrointestinal illness (GI) in the Chilean population, describe its burden and presentation, identify risk factors associated with GI and assess the differences between a 7-day, 15-day and a 30-day recall period in the population-based burden of illness study design. Face-to-face surveys were conducted on 6047 randomly selected residents in the Metropolitan region, Chile (average response rate 75·8%) in 2008. The age-adjusted monthly prevalence of GI was 9·2%. The 7-day recall period provided annual incidence rate estimates about 2·2 times those of the 30-day recall period. Age, occupation, healthcare system, sewer system, antibiotic use and cat ownership were all found to be significant predictors for being a case. This study expands on the discussion of recall bias in retrospective population studies and reports the first population-based burden and distribution of GI estimates in Chile.

No abstract