Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31569632›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2019

Intensive Livestock Farming and Residential Health: Experts' Views.

Valérie Eijrond, Liesbeth Claassen, Joke van der Giessen, Danielle Timmermans

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Zoonotic bacteria in the vicinity of animal farms as a factor disturbing the human microbiome: a review.International journal of occupational medicine and environmental health · 2024
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Untangling the Governance of Public Health Aspects of Manure in The Netherlands.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Valérie EijrondAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Van der Boechorststraat 7, NL-1081 BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands. v.eijrond@amsterdamumc.nl.
Liesbeth ClaassenAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Van der Boechorststraat 7, NL-1081 BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands. liesbeth.claassen@rivm.nl.
Joke van der GiessenCentre for Infectious Disease Control Netherlands, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), 3720 BA Bilthoven, The Netherlands. joke.van.der.giessen@rivm.nl.
Danielle TimmermansAmsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam Public Health research institute, Van der Boechorststraat 7, NL-1081 BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands. drm.timmermans@amsterdamumc.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The presence of intensive livestock farms in close vicinity to residential areas in the Netherlands is a complex problem characterised by knowledge uncertainty about the effects on residential health, overlapping value-driven concerns and stakeholder diversity. In order to address concerns about the health effects and effectively manage the debate about intensive livestock farming, constructive stakeholder dialogues are encouraged, informed by current scientific insights. We explored the current knowledge, beliefs and concerns of scientific experts, following the mental models approach. A summary expert model was derived from scanning the relevant literature and informed by interviews with 20 scientific experts. The study shows imprecise use of terminology by experts. Moreover, they appear to perceive intensive livestock farming not as a major health problem at least at this moment for neighbouring residents in the Netherlands. Broader themes such as (environmental) unsustainability and biodiversity loss seem a more prominent concern among the experts. Our study questions whether dialogues should only focus on residential health or cover broader values and concerns. However, mental models about risk may differ with other stakeholders, impeding communication. Hence, we will identify other stakeholders' knowledge, beliefs and value-based concerns in the light of facilitating constructed dialogues between stakeholders.

Indexed as

Animal HusbandryEnvironmental HealthExpert TestimonyFarmsLivestockResidence CharacteristicsAnimalsAttitude to HealthFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleModels, TheoreticalNetherlandsStakeholder Participationintensive livestock farmingmental models

Identifiers

PMID31569632
PMCPMC6801788

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.