ArticleIranian journal of public health2022
Evaluation of Our Rabies Prevention Practices: Is Our Approach Correct?
Article in Iranian journal of public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Post-Exposure Rabies Prophylaxis in Children: Real-World Practices From an 11-Year Retrospective Study in Türkiye.Acta paediatrica (Oslo, Norway : 1992) · 2026Article
- Rabies post-exposure prophylaxis in children: adherence to national guidelines in a country at ongoing risk.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Rabies Vaccination and Public Health Insights in the Extended Arabian Gulf and Saudi Arabia: A Systematic Scoping Review.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Dog ecology and rabies control including canine vaccination coverage: Impacts from a survey in Madagascar.PloS one · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Rabies disease is zoonotic disease-causing encephalitis and resulting in death. It is possible to prevent the disease with suitable prophylaxis approaches. This study examined the compliance of post-exposure prophylaxis approaches with the guidelines and the reasons for non-compliance in contact cases at risk of rabies. Methods: This retrospective cross-sectional study includes patients who continued the vaccination program from 2014-2018 at the Ordu University Medical Faculty Hospital Rabies Vaccination Center in Ordu, Turkey. Cases were assessed in terms of sociodemographic features, previous rabies vaccination history, features of the contact with rabies risk, attendance duration after contact, and whether all stages of prophylaxis were completed after contact. Results: Of the 748 cases attending the vaccination center, the age range was 1- 91 yr, with a mean age of 28.12 ± 21.60 yr. Of cases, 62.3% were male (n =466) and 37.7% were female (n =282). Of risky contact, 60% comprised stray animals. Of recorded cases, 55.2% displayed approaches compatible with guidelines. Among incompliant approaches, the most frequent was administering vaccines even though observation was sufficient. (n = 174, 52%). Conclusion: Contact with risk of rabies may result in insufficient administration of the stages in prophylaxis after contact, or contrarily, mistaken administration based on acting with a sense of excessive safety. Stray dogs or domestic animals without sufficient vaccinations comprise a significant risk despite all efforts. In order to prevent risky contact, there is a need for the development of correct strategies and to ensure continuity of in-service training for health professionals.
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.