ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2016
Potential Exposures to Australian Bat Lyssavirus Notified in Queensland, Australia, 2009-2014.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Equine Rabies in Southern Colombia, 2024-2025.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Perceptions and public health risks of the bat-human interface in households from fragmented rural landscapes in southern Chile.PloS one · 2026Article
- Human-bat contacts in the Netherlands, and potential risks for virus exchange.One health outlook · 2025Article
- Are we doing enough to control infection risk in Australian small animal veterinary practice? Findings from a mixed methods study.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- Emerging Rhabdoviruses and Human Infection.Biology · 2023Review
- A review of the circumstances and health-seeking behaviours associated with bat exposures in high-income countries.Zoonoses and public health · 2022Review
- Public Health Awareness on Bat Rabies among Bat Handlers and Persons Residing near Bat Roosts in Makurdi, Nigeria.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- What can we learn from over a decade of testing bats in New South Wales to exclude infection with Australian bat lyssaviruses?Australian veterinary journal · 2022Review
- The epidemiology and outcomes of central nervous system infections in Far North Queensland, tropical Australia; 2000-2019.PloS one · 2022Article
- Australian Bat Lyssavirus: Analysis of National Bat Surveillance Data from 2010 to 2016.Viruses · 2021Article
- Establishment of a longitudinal pre-clinical model of lyssavirus infection.Journal of virological methods · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAustralian bat lyssavirus (ABLV) belongs to the genus Lyssavirus which also includes classic rabies virus and the European lyssaviruses. To date, the only three known human ABLV cases, all fatal, have been reported from Queensland, Australia. ABLV is widely distributed in Australian bats, and any bite or scratch from an Australian bat is considered a potential exposure to ABLV. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL
findingsPotential exposure to ABLV has been a notifiable condition in Queensland since 2005. We analysed notification data for potential exposures occurring between 2009 and 2014. There were 1,515 potential exposures to ABLV notified in Queensland, with an average annual notification rate of 5.6 per 100,000 population per year. The majority of notified individuals (96%) were potentially exposed to ABLV via bats, with a small number of cases potentially exposed via two ABLV infected horses and an ABLV infected human. The most common routes of potential exposure were through bat scratches (47%) or bites (37%), with less common routes being mucous membrane/broken skin exposure to bat saliva/brain tissue (2.2%). Intentional handling of bats by the general public was the major cause of potential exposures (56% of notifications). Examples of these potential exposures included people attempting to rescue bats caught in barbed wire fences/fruit tree netting, or attempting to remove bats from a home. Following potential exposures, 1,399 cases (92%) were recorded as having appropriate post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) as defined in national guidelines, with the remainder having documentation of refusal or incomplete PEP. Up to a quarter of notifications occurred after two days from the potential exposure, but with some delays being more than three weeks. Of 393 bats available for testing during the reporting period, 20 (5.1%) had ABLV detected, including four species of megabats (all flying foxes) and one species of microbats (yellow-bellied sheathtail bat). CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Public health strategies should address the strong motivation of some members of the public to help injured bats or bats in distress, by emphasising that their action may harm the bat and put themselves at risk of the fatal ABLV infection. Alternative messaging should include seeking advice from professional animal rescue groups, or in the event of human contact, public health units. Further efforts are required to ensure that when potential exposure occurs, timely reporting and appropriate post-exposure prophylaxis occur.
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.