ArticleJournal of agromedicine2017
Sorting Through the Spheres of Influence: Using Modified Pile Sorting to Describe Who Influences Dairy Farmers' Decision-Making About Safety.
Article in Journal of agromedicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Needs assessment survey for enhancing United States child agricultural injury prevention capacity: Brief report.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Who and How: Exploring the Preferred Senders and Channels of Mental Health Information for Wisconsin Farmers.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Augmented Reality Farm MAPPER Development: Lessons Learned from an App Designed to Improve Rural Emergency Response.Journal of agromedicine · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe primary goal of this study was to describe the mutually perceived influence of bankers and insurers on their agricultural clients' decision-making regarding health and safety.
methodsSemistructured interviews were conducted with 10 dairy farmers, 11 agricultural bankers, and 10 agricultural insurers from central Wisconsin. Three of the interview questions involved pile sorting. Pile sorting included 5-point Likert-like scales to help participants sort through 32 index cards. Each card represented an individual or group that was thought to possibly affect farmers' decision-making, both generally and about health and safety. Results (photographs of piles of cards quantified into spread sheets, fieldnotes, and interview transcripts) were analyzed with SAS and NVivo.
resultsAll three groups expressed moderate-to-strong positive opinions about involving agricultural bankers (x2(2) = 2.8155, p = 0.2695), although bankers qualitatively expressed apprehension due to regulations on the industry. Insurance agents received more positive support, particularly from bankers but also from dairy farmers themselves, and expressed more confidence in being involved in designing and implementing a farm safety program.
conclusionAgricultural bankers and insurers can influence individual farmer's decision-making about health and safety. Both are believed to be good purveyors of safety programs and knowledge, especially when leveraging financial incentives. Insurance agents are thought to be more critical in the design of safety programs. Insurers and bankers being financially tied to safety programs may prove both positive and negative, as farmers may be skeptical about the intention of the incentives, making messaging critical.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.