ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2021
Evaluating Surveillance for and Estimating Administration of Rabies Postexposure Prophylaxis in the United States, 2012-2018.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Landscape-scale analysis of raccoon rabies surveillance reveals different drivers of disease dynamics across latitude.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2025Article
- The Economic Landscape of Global Rabies: A Scoping Review and Future Directions.Tropical medicine and infectious disease · 2025Review
- Defining County-Level Terrestrial Rabies Freedom Using the US National Rabies Surveillance System: Surveillance Data Analysis.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2023Article
- A statewide, cross-sectional evaluation of the knowledge and level of concern of rabies among South Carolina residents.Zoonoses and public health · 2023Article
- Notes from the Field: Three Human Rabies Deaths Attributed to Bat Exposures - United States, August 2021.MMWR. Morbidity and mortality weekly report · 2022Article
- The epidemiology of dog bite injuries in Greece: preliminary results of a surveillance scheme.HippokratiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAn evaluation of postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) surveillance has not been conducted in over 10 years in the United States. An accurate assessment would be important to understand current rabies trends and inform public health preparedness and response to human rabies. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPLE
findingsTo understand PEP surveillance, we sent a survey to public health leads for rabies in 50 U.S. states, Puerto Rico, Washington DC, Philadelphia, and New York City. Of leads from 54 jurisdictions, 39 (72%) responded to the survey; 12 reported having PEP-specific surveillance, five had animal bite surveillance that included data about PEP, four had animal bite surveillance without data about PEP, and 18 (46%) had neither. Although 12 jurisdictions provided data about PEP use, poor data quality and lack of national representativeness prevented use of this data to derive a national-level PEP estimate. We used national-level and state specific data from the Healthcare Cost & Utilization Project (HCUP) to estimate the number of people who received PEP based on emergency department (ED) visits. The estimated annual average of initial ED visits for PEP administration during 2012-2017 in the United States was 46,814 (SE: 1,697), costing upwards of 165 million USD. State-level ED data for initial visits for administration of PEP for rabies exposure using HCUP data was compared to state-level surveillance data from Maryland, Vermont, and Georgia between 2012-2017. In all states, state-level surveillance data was consistently lower than estimates of initial ED visits, suggesting even states with robust PEP surveillance may not adequately capture individuals who receive PEP.
conclusionsOur findings suggest that making PEP a nationally reportable condition may not be feasible. Other methods of tracking administration of PEP such as syndromic surveillance or identification of sentinel states should be considered to obtain an accurate assessment.
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.