Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37242989›Full record

ArticleVaccines2023

Comparative Evaluation of Intradermal

Swathi Gopalaiah, Kshama M Appaiah, Shrikrishna Isloor, Dilip Lakshman, Ramesh P Thimmaiah, Suguna Rao, Mahadevappa Gouri, Naveen Kumar, Kavitha Govindaiah, Avinash Bhat and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Vaccines, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 48% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Swathi GopalaiahDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, Veterinary College, KVAFSU, Bengaluru 560024, India.
Kshama M AppaiahDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, Veterinary College, KVAFSU, Bengaluru 560024, India.
Shrikrishna IsloorKVAFSU-CVA Rabies Diagnostic Laboratory, WOAH Reference Laboratory for Rabies, Department of Veterinary Microbiology, Veterinary College, KVAFSU, Bengaluru 560024, India.
Dilip LakshmanKVAFSU-CVA Rabies Diagnostic Laboratory, WOAH Reference Laboratory for Rabies, Department of Veterinary Microbiology, Veterinary College, KVAFSU, Bengaluru 560024, India.
Ramesh P ThimmaiahDepartment of Veterinary Medicine, Veterinary College, KVAFSU, Bengaluru 560024, India.
Suguna RaoDepartment of Veterinary Pathology, Veterinary College, KVAFSU, Bengaluru 560024, India.
Mahadevappa GouriDepartment of LFC, Veterinary College, KVAFSU, Bengaluru 560024, India.
Naveen KumarDepartment of AGB, Veterinary College, KVAFSU, Bengaluru 560024, India.ORCID 0000-0003-2579-3521
Kavitha GovindaiahDepartment of Biological Production, IAH and VB, KVAFSU, Bengaluru 560024, India.ORCID 0009-0007-9337-0068
Avinash BhatMasterlab, Nutreco, 5831 JN Boxmeer, The Netherlands.
Simmi TiwariZoonosis Division, National Centre for Disease Control, Directorate General of Health Service, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, GOI, Delhi 110054, India.
Karnataka Veterinary Animal and Fisheries Sciences University · INNational Center for Disease Control · INNutreco (Netherlands) · NL

Funding

NCDC ISC/570812/2018/DZDP-NCDC(Pt2)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rabies is a progressively fatal viral disease affecting a wide variety of warm-blooded animals and human beings. With cattle being major part of Indian livestock population, rabies can result in significant financial losses. Immunization of livestock vulnerable to exposure is the best way to control rabies. The present study was undertaken to investigate the efficacy of a rabies pre-exposure prophylactic vaccine administered through different routes and to sequentially monitor the levels of rabies virus-neutralizing antibody (RVNA) titers in cattle. Thirty cattle were divided into five groups of six animals each. Group I and III animals were immunized with 1 mL and 0.2 mL of rabies vaccine through intramuscular (IM) and intradermal (ID) routes, respectively, on day 0, with a booster dose on day 21; Group II and IV animals were immunized with 1 mL and 0.2 mL of rabies vaccine, respectively, without the booster dose; unvaccinated animals served as a control (Group V). Serum samples were collected on days 0, 14, 28, and 90 to estimate RVNA titers using the rapid fluorescent focus inhibition test (RFFIT). The titers were above an adequate level (≥0.5 IU/mL) on day 14 and maintained up to 90 days in all animals administered the rabies vaccine through the IM and ID route with or without a booster dose. The study indicated that both routes of vaccination are safe and effective in providing protection against rabies. Hence, both routes can be considered for pre-exposure prophylaxis. However, the ID route proved to be more economical due to its dose-sparing effect.

Indexed as

cattleIDIMpre-exposure prophylactic vaccineRFFITRVNA

Identifiers

PMID37242989
PMCPMC10220582
OpenAlexW4366829869

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.