Literature DB >> 9234427

Validation of a poultry biosecurity survey.

R Nespeca1, J P Vaillancourt, W E Morrow.   

Abstract

A questionnaire for farm managers was designed, to obtain information regarding biosecurity on Ontario commercial broiler chicken and turkey operations, and then pre-tested. The questions that could be validated were verifiable by seeing the facility, by using farm records or by interviewing technical personnel other than the survey respondent. The survey was validated using a convenience sample of 24 farms from two companies. For 15 questions with dichotomous responses, the sensitivity ranged from 16.7 to 100%; the specificity ranged from 0 to 100%. For example, fences and gates seen during the farm visit were not accurately reported on the survey (poor sensitivity). Chance-corrected agreement was low (kappa < 0.4) for 34 questions, fair to good (0.4 < kappa < 0.8) for 25 questions, and excellent (kappa > 0.8) for seven questions. The percent agreement for questions where only one of the possible options was observed on validation ranged from 60.9 to 100%. Five questions with continuous numeric variables were analysed. A difference was observed (P < 0.1) between the survey and validation data for three questions regarding the number of birds, the bird sources and the downtime between flocks. In spite of pre-testing, the lack of clear wording and the absence of definitions for technical terms appeared to reduce validity. Response bias seems to be an issue with biosecurity surveys. The value of validating questionnaires before their use in epidemiologic research is confirmed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9234427     DOI: 10.1016/s0167-5877(96)01122-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prev Vet Med        ISSN: 0167-5877            Impact factor:   2.670


  6 in total

1.  Accuracy of herdsmen reporting versus serologic testing for estimating foot-and-mouth disease prevalence.

Authors:  Kenton L Morgan; Ian G Handel; Vincent N Tanya; Saidou M Hamman; Charles Nfon; Ingrid E Bergman; Viviana Malirat; Karl J Sorensen; Barend M de C Bronsvoort
Journal:  Emerg Infect Dis       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 6.883

2.  Biosecurity practices on Australian commercial layer and meat chicken farms: Performance and perceptions of farmers.

Authors:  Angela Bullanday Scott; Mini Singh; Peter Groves; Marta Hernandez-Jover; Belinda Barnes; Kathryn Glass; Barbara Moloney; Amanda Black; Jenny-Ann Toribio
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-04-18       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Quantitative assessment of biosecurity in broiler farms using Biocheck.UGent in Central Luzon, Philippines.

Authors:  N C Tanquilut; M V O Espaldon; D F Eslava; R C Ancog; C D R Medina; M G V Paraso; R D Domingo; J Dewulf
Journal:  Poult Sci       Date:  2020-03-05       Impact factor: 3.352

4.  Characterization of commercial poultry farms in Mexico: Towards a better understanding of biosecurity practices and antibiotic usage patterns.

Authors:  Erika Ornelas-Eusebio; Gary García-Espinosa; Karine Laroucau; Gina Zanella
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-12-01       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  The Role of Biosecurity in the Control of Campylobacter: A Qualitative Study of the Attitudes and Perceptions of UK Broiler Farm Workers.

Authors:  Alexandra Royden; Robert Christley; Alison Prendiville; Nicola J Williams
Journal:  Front Vet Sci       Date:  2021-12-21

6.  Appraisal of Chicken Production with Associated Biosecurity Practices in Commercial Poultry Farms Located in Jos, Nigeria.

Authors:  C V Maduka; I O Igbokwe; N N Atsanda
Journal:  Scientifica (Cairo)       Date:  2016-04-21
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.