Policymakers often assume that farmers with pro-environmental behavior are more likely to follow proper pesticide practices and thus, in order to improve the safety of their pesticide practices, they implement strategies and programs designed to raise environmental awareness among the general public. The aim of this paper is to examine whether pro-environmental behavior can instigate proper pesticide practices among farmers. According to our results, farmers’ environmental behavior does not affect their pesticide practices and thus strategies aiming at raising environmental awareness among the general public would not prompt them to follow proper pesticide practices. In addition, the respondents reported following overall proper practices such as wearing masks and appropriate clothes during sprayings as well as rinsing the empty containers by performing the triple-rinse method. However, they did not wear gloves during applications, and many disposed the remaining pesticide concentrate to non-arable land. To conclude, in order to improve farmers’ pesticide practices, strategies and programs specifically designed for farmers must be developed because those addressed to the general public would not be effective. Moreover, certain improper practices found in this study ought to be addressed by policymakers and actors involved in the agricultural sector.
Background Little is known about how different outlier estimation methods affect cutoff limits for outliers in single fiber electromyography. Methods We compared in a prospective fashion the established 18th jitter value (18thjv) method to three, whole‐distribution based, outlier detection methods: the interquartile range (IQR), the log‐normal, and the Z‐score method. The reference limits were probed in a normal cohort and in myasthenia gravis (MG) patients. Results Differences in outlier cutoff values between the different methods were in the range of 2 μs. The number of abnormal muscles according to the computed criteria was similar for all four methods in the control group. Classification metrics (sensitivity, specificity, Youden's statistic, and predictive values) were also similar among the different methods. In the MG group, however, the Z‐score method failed to identify the abnormal jitter values. Accordingly, Kappa agreement was substantial to perfect (0.658 to 1) between the three methods (18thjv, IQR, and log‐normal), but was equivalent to chance between the three methods and the Z‐score in the MG group. Conclusions The established 18thjv method proved largely robust when compared to whole‐distribution based methods, and its use in clinical practice is justified. Simple estimation of outlier limits by adding two SDs to the mean of the data, leads to unacceptable deviations from the true cutoff values. Moreover, in a clinical scenario in which the final electrodiagnosis depends only on the number of outliers, it is meaningful to accept a tolerance zone of about 2 μs, which is the approximate variation range among the different methods.
Fatigability is the hallmark of myasthenia gravis (MG). It is not clear, however, whether there is an analogous increase in jitter during the course of a single fiber electromyography (SFEMG) session. The individual jitter values of all potentials of 76 normal and 44 myasthenic orbicularis oculi muscles were assigned a rank number according to their temporal order in which they were collected and linear regression was performed to determine if the slope of the regression line was significantly different from zero. Control and MG subjects displayed rather flat linear regression lines with non-significant positive or negative slopes. Accordingly, ROC analysis yielded areas under the curve near 0.5. We conclude that there is no systematic jitter increase during the collection of 20 potential pairs in a typical SFEMG session.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.