ArticleTropical medicine and infectious disease2024
A Perspective of the Epidemiology of Rabies in South Africa, 1998-2019.
Article in Tropical medicine and infectious disease, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Post-COVID-19 Rabies Surveillance and Risk Factors in Rural Eastern Cape, South Africa: A One Health Perspective.Infectious disease reports · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Despite the implementation of various control strategies aimed at eliminating canine-mediated rabies, the disease is still endemic in up to 150 countries across the world. Rabies remains endemic to South Africa, with various reservoir species (both wildlife species and domestic dogs) capable of maintaining rabies infection, and the epidemiology of the disease is yet to be adequately defined. As such, this study used surveillance data collected between 1998 and 2019 from the two diagnostic laboratories in the country for a statistical space-time analysis to determine regions where significant disease clusters could occur. In addition, the robustness of surveillance activities across the country was evaluated through the mathematical evaluation and visualization of testing rates based on the average number of samples tested per species group. In our study, various significant disease clusters were detected for domestic animals, wildlife and livestock. The significant disease clusters for domestic animals and livestock were primarily restricted to eastern South Africa, while the significant disease clusters in wildlife species were detected across northern and western South Africa. Furthermore, the testing rates identified districts from various provinces where surveillance activities could be considered inadequate, consequently influencing the geographical range of the observed clusters. These results could be used to direct intervention campaigns towards high-risk areas, while also allocating the required resources to improve surveillance in the surrounding areas where surveillance was deemed inadequate.
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.