Descriptive characteristics of the study population
| Variables | T1 | T2 | p Value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Participation in organisations (n; %) | |||
| Does not participate | 77 (37.0) | 76 (36.5) | (0.91)* |
| Participates | 131 (62.9) | 132 (63.4) | |
| Neurocognitive performance index† (mean, SD) | 4.4 (1.4) | 4.3 (1.4) | (0.20)‡ |
| Use of IPM practices (n; %) | |||
| No use | 83 (39.9) | 93 (44.7) | |
| Little/moderate use | 55 (26.4) | 55 (26.4) | (0.52)§ |
| Good/very good use | 70 (33.6) | 60 (28.8) | |
| Uses pesticides Ib and II¶ (n; %) | |||
| 0 kg/ha | 52 (25.0) | 58 (27.8) | |
| ≤1.1 kg/ha | 73 (35.1) | 66 (31.7) | (0.67)‡ |
| >1.1 kg/ha | 83 (39.0) | 84 (40.3) | |
| Years of schooling**(mean, SD) | 6.1 (2.4) | 6.3 (2.6) | |
| Age in years (mean, SD) | 41.7 (13.0) | 44.2 (13.1) | |
Andean region of Ecuador at T1 (2007) and T2 (2010). (n=208 individuals in charge of managing the farm).
*p Value according to the McNemar test.
†Neurocognitive performance measured using the ‘Digit-Span Task’. Higher values reflect a better performance.
‡p Value according to paired t test.
§p Value according to the Stuart-Maxwell test.
¶Ib and II: High and moderately hazardous pesticides.
**The difference in average years of schooling between T1 and T2 exists because some people took literacy courses, thus adding study time.
IPM, integrated pest management.