Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39852667›Full record

ArticleTropical medicine and infectious disease2025

The Deadly Details: How Clear and Complete Are Publicly Available Sources of Human Rabies Information?

Natalie Patane, Owen Eades, Jennifer Morris, Olivia Mac, Kirsten McCaffery, Sarah L McGuinness

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Tropical medicine and infectious disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

6 authors.

Natalie PataneInfectious Diseases Epidemiology Unit, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia.
Owen EadesInfectious Diseases Epidemiology Unit, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia.
Jennifer MorrisIndependent Consumer Advisor, Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia.
Olivia MacSydney Health Literacy Lab, School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.
Kirsten McCafferySydney Health Literacy Lab, School of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.
Sarah L McGuinnessInfectious Diseases Epidemiology Unit, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5725-0102

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council GNT2017229
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human rabies is preventable but almost always fatal once symptoms appear, causing 59,000 global deaths each year. Limited awareness and inconsistent access to post-exposure prophylaxis hinder prevention efforts. To identify gaps and opportunities for improvement in online rabies information, we assessed the readability, understandability, actionability, and completeness of online public rabies resources from government and health agencies in Australia and similar countries, with the aim of identifying gaps and opportunities for improvement. We identified materials via Google and public health agency websites, assessing readability using the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) index and understandability and actionability with the Patient Education Materials Tool for Print materials (PEMAT-P). Completeness was assessed using a framework focused on general and vaccine-specific rabies information. An analysis of 22 resources found a median readability of grade 13 (range: 10-15), with a mean understandability of 66% and mean actionability of 60%; both below recommended thresholds. Mean completeness was 79% for general rabies information and 36% for vaccine-specific information. Visual aids were under-utilised, and critical vaccine-specific information was often lacking. These findings highlight significant barriers in rabies information for the public, with most resources requiring a high literacy level and lacking adequate understandability and actionability. Improving readability, adding visual aids, and enhancing vaccine-related content could improve accessibility and support wider prevention efforts.

Indexed as

health literacypatient informationpreventionpublic healthrabiesreadabilityvaccination

Identifiers

PMID39852667
PMCPMC11768519

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.