Veterinarian barriers to knowledge translation (KT) within the context of swine infectious disease research: an international survey of swine veterinarians

Abstract

Background Food animal veterinarians face commodity specific and urgent global challenges yet conditions preventing use of best available knowledge have been sparsely studied. The American Association of Swine Veterinarians (AASV) membership (N = 1289) was surveyed online to benchmark their information priorities and their motivations and sources for keeping current with infectious disease research, and to describe their reported time, skill, access, and process as barriers to knowledge translation (KT). Results Respondents (n = 80) were mostly from Canada (n = 40) and the U.S.A (n = 31) and demographics approximated the AASV’s. Colleagues are the first choice for information on difficult cases (49%, 95%CI: 38–61). Half of respondents (53%, 95%CI: 41–64) spend an hour or less per week keeping up with infectious disease research. The majority reported moderate or less than moderate efficiency (62%, 95%CI: 51–72), and moderate or greater stress (59%, 95%CI: 48–70) with their process for keeping up. Journal article methods sections are commonly not read, almost a third (32%, 95% CI: 22–43) reported either they do not evaluate statistical methods or that they had poor confidence to do so, and half (52, 95%CI: 41–63) could not explain ‘confounding bias’. Approximately half (55%, 95%CI: 41-69) with direct oversight of swine herds had full access to 2 or fewer academic journals. Approximately a third of respondents (34%, 95%CI: 24–46) selected only formats involving single research studies (either full text or summaries) as preferred reading materials for keeping current over expert summaries of the body of evidence. Conclusion KT barriers are considerable and a source of stress for many swine veterinarians. Sub-optimal efficiency with keeping up and low confidence to appraise aspects of research are concerns. Results are consistent with previous literature and illustrate need for improved KT infrastructure and for additional training in statistical methods and interpretation of primary research. Further evaluation is warranted of why approximately a third of veterinarians in this study, for the purpose of keeping up, preferentially choose to review individual research studies over choices that would include an expert summary of the body of evidence. Consideration of reasons for this preference will be important in the planning of KT infrastructure improvements.

Classification of porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome clinical impact in Ontario sow herds using machine learning approaches

“…We used three encoding strategies to encode the symbolic string sequences as input to ML algorithms: (1) dummy variable encoding was used to encode the categorical information into numeric values and (2) the increased dimensionality in the number of variables with low sample size makes ML algorithms prone to overfitting, which is also known as the 'curse of dimensionality' (38,39). As the ORF-5 sequences are highly dimensional, we reduced the dimensionality by using principal component analysis (PCA) based embedded representation for extracting low dimensional features of different sizes (i.e., 2,3,5,10,15,20). PCA selects the best-performing features which overcome the issues related to the 'curse of dimensionality. '…”

“…Porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome (PRRS) is currently considered the most important endemic viral disease affecting commercial swine populations in North America ( 1 , 2 ). PRRS is present globally, with only a few countries with swine populations in Europe (i.e., Switzerland, Sweden, Norway, and Finland) and New Zealand free from it ( 3 , 4 ).…”

Maximizing value and minimizing waste in swine research: Availability and accessibility of research reports

“…It has been reported that approximately half of North American swine veterinarians interested in infectious disease research have access to 2 or fewer journals. 22 Some research may not be available to end users because of the language in which the report was written; this may be because English-speaking individuals cannot read non-English publications or because non-English-speaking individuals cannot read English publications. However, English is recognized as the lingua franca of scientific publications.…”

Evidence-Based Treatment, assisted by Mobile Technology to Deliver, and Evidence-Based Drugs in South Asian Countries

“…In 1990, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) of the National Academy of Sciences defined Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) as "systematically developed recommendations to help clinicians and patients make important decisions about patient care for certain clinical conditions" [14,15]. The IOM guidelines advisory panels created clear standards for appraising the appropriateness of practice guidelines.…”