ArticlePerspectives in clinical research
Comparison of pre-COVID-19 pandemic, lockdown, and postlockdown participant adherence in a phase IV clinical trial for the treatment of postexposure rabies prophylaxis.
Article in Perspectives in clinical research. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The impact of nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) on rabies post-exposure prophylaxis: A comparative study in Wuhan, 2022 vs. 2023.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Article
- Trends and Burden of Human Rabies in Iran 2012-2021: A Cross-Sectional Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Drivers of rabies post-exposure prophylaxis noncompletion in Cambodia, 2019 to 2022.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2025Article
- Disruption of healthcare delivery and clinical trial operations during COVID-19: Lessons learned, planning for solutions.Perspectives in clinical researchArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Context: One of the most frequent difficulties encountered in clinical trials is the failure to retain participants and this is doubly important when the disease is 100% fatal. Studies conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic regarding adherence have been equivocal. Aims: The aim of this study is to compare participant adherence in a phase IV clinical trial for postexposure rabies prophylaxis before the pandemic, during lockdown, and after lockdown. Settings and Design: An observational study (audit). Subjects and Methods: The study in May 2023 covers the period from October 2019 to March 2022. Individual participant files of recruited participants were examined for adherence to treatment in the prepandemic period, during lockdown, and postlockdown eras. Statistical Analysis Used: The primary outcome measure-participant adherence anti-rabies vaccination (ARV completion) in the three timelines was compared using the Chi-squared test. The secondary outcome measures: reasons for nonadherence and potential factors associated with it done by univariate followed by multivariate logistic regression. All analyses conducted at a 5% significance level. Results: A total of 455 (2046 ARV visits) participants were recruited in the original Phase IV study, with a mean (±standard deviation) age of 31.9 ± 16.23 years. The COVID-19 lockdown reported the highest nonadherence to ARV (5/26, 19%) due to travel restriction and fear of contracting SARS-CoV2 infection compared to prepandemic (9/144, 6%) and postlockdown (6/285, 2%) periods. Conclusion: There was a significant reduction in participant adherence for ARV completion during the lockdown compared to the prepandemic and postlockdown timelines. Decentralized Clinical Trials may offer potential solutions to improve adherence in the context of epidemics and pandemics.
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.