ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2023
Regional variation in knowledge and practice regarding common zoonoses among livestock farmers of selective districts in Nepal.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Awareness and practices survey of two ancient zoonotic diseases in Dhading District of Nepal.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Livestock farmers' knowledge, attitudes and practices relating to zoonoses in the Coastal Savannah zone of Ghana.International health · 2026Article
- A socio-ecological approach to the determinants of animal health management: A scoping review.PloS one · 2026Article
- Zoonotic disease risk perceptions and practices related to livestock production and consumption: a qualitative study among animal rearers and veterinary care providers in Northeast India.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- African swine fever in Nepal: risk factors, impacts, and strategies for control.Science in One Health · 2026Review
- One health assessment of farmers' knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAPs) on zoonoses in Bangladesh.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Milk and meat safety in Nepal: addressing challenges and exploring solutions.Science in One Health · 2025Review
- Zoonotic diseases awareness and food safety practices among livestock farmers in Nepal.Frontiers in veterinary science · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe majority of Nepalese people are involved in farming. However, due to limited knowledge of zoonoses and poor preventive practices on the part of livestock farmers, vulnerabilities to zoonotic diseases are very high. The main objective of this study was to assess the regional variation in zoonoses-related knowledge and preventive practices of livestock farmers in different ecological regions of Nepal. MATERIAL AND
methodsDescriptive cross-sectional quantitative research design was followed in the study. The total sample size was 380 livestock farmers from randomly selected three ecological regions of Nepal. Systematic sampling techniques were applied for data collection. Data were entered into an excel sheet and then imported into Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) software. The data were calculated using descriptive statistics. Univariate, and bivariate analyses were performed, and the result of the study was presented in the form of text and tables based on their nature.
resultsOf the studied six zoonotic diseases, most of the respondents (95.8%) knew about zoonotic bird flu; 90.7% of them, were about rabies; and 54.2% knew about swine flu. However, a few respondents knew about bovine tuberculosis, neurocysticercosis, and brucellosis. Ecologically, the highest number of respondents in Nawalpur had knowledge of rabies (95.3%), and swine flu (61.6%), whereas 98.3% of them had knowledge of avian influenza in Tanahun; and 12.5% of neurocysticercosis in Manang. Regarding zoonoses preventive practices such as regular hand washing with soap water, mask-wearing, gloves, boots, the respondents' representation of 60.8%, 6.6%, 1.8%, and 1.3% respectively in such practices show that although these are easy and cost-effective, personal protective equipment (PPE), such preventive practices were extremely underperformed. Not only that, only 12% of respondents maintain a standard distance (>15m.) between their house and shed. Similarly, 17% still consumed meat from sick animals, and vaccination of livestock was also found poor coverage (36%) in the study.
conclusionsLivestock farmers need to be more knowledgeable about many common zoonotic diseases, and their preventive practices still need improvement, with significant regional variation in the study. This has invited various zoonosis threats for them. Therefore, it is recommended that the interventional programs related to common zoonoses be conducted for livestock farmers to solve the problem.
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.