ArticlePloS one2023
Evaluation of potential rabies exposure among Japanese international travelers: A retrospective descriptive study.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough Japan has been a rabies-free country for >50 years, a few cases have been reported among people traveling abroad. This study aimed to investigate animal exposure among Japanese travelers using the Japanese Registry for Infectious Diseases from Abroad (J-RIDA).
methodIn this retrospective analysis, we examined Japanese overseas travelers with animal exposure, as included the J-RIDA database, reported from October 1, 2017, to October 31, 2019, with a focus on pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) administration and the animals to which the patients were exposed.
resultsAmong the 322 cases included in the analysis, 19 (5.9%) patients received PrEP and 303 did not. The most common purpose of travel was a non-package tour (n = 175, 54.3%). Most trips (n = 213, 66.1%) were to a single country for <2 weeks. Most patients (n = 286, 87.9%) traveled to countries with a rabies risk. The majority of patients with and without PrEP were injured in rabies-risk countries [n = 270 (89.1%) for non-PrEP and n = 16 (84.2%) for PrEP]. Animals associated with injuries included dogs (55.0%), cats (25.5%), and monkeys (15.5%). Most patients were classified as World Health Organization Category II/III for contact with suspected rabid animals (39.5% and 44.1% for categories II and III, respectively) and had exposure within 5 days of travel. Southeast Asia (n = 180, 55.9%) was the most common region in which travelers were exposed to animals.
conclusionsJapanese overseas travelers had contact with animals that could possibly transmit the rabies virus, even on short trips. Promoting pre-travel consultation and increasing awareness of the potential for rabies exposure are important for prevention of rabies among Japanese international travelers.
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.