ArticleVeterinary record open2023
Perspectives of on-farm biosecurity and disease prevention among selected pig veterinarians and pig farmers in Sweden.
Article in Veterinary record open, 2023. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tailored biosecurity training for veterinarians and farmers: bridging knowledge and practice gaps.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- Enhancing infection control practices and biosecurity plans on Swedish pig farms: insights, challenges, and strategies.Acta veterinaria Scandinavica · 2024Article
- Perspectives of on-farm biosecurity and disease prevention among selected pig veterinarians and pig farmers in Sweden.Veterinary record open · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Biosecurity is important in preventing the spread of infectious diseases in animal production. Previous studies have identified a disparity between the biosecurity recommendations provided by veterinarians and the actual practices implemented by farmers. This study compared group discussions with a few key actors among Swedish pig veterinarians and farmers on pig farm biosecurity. Methods: Two focus group discussions were conducted, one with five Swedish pig veterinarians and one with three pig farmers, to explore their views on pig farm biosecurity and efficient biosecurity measures. The discussions were analysed to identify differences and similarities in how biosecurity was perceived. Results: The study identified differences between the veterinarians and pig farmers in how they perceived good biosecurity and the level of biosecurity in Swedish pig herds. The veterinarians perceived that adhering strictly to the farming system and its barriers was essential for good biosecurity. The biosecurity in the pig farms was often considered inadequate. The veterinarians described difficulties in biosecurity-related communication with the farmers. The pig farmers valued the flexibility of the farming system over strict barriers and described that the level of biosecurity was good in Swedish pig herds. However, both groups also shared similar views regarding the challenges in farm biosecurity. They highlighted that biosecurity measures with proven efficacy are important for farmer motivation. Conclusions: This limited study suggested that different perspectives on biosecurity can contribute to communication difficulties between pig farmers and veterinarians. Acknowledging both the differences and similarities of the different perspectives may help improve cooperation and communication in biosecurity-related questions.
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.