ReviewJournal of family medicine and primary care2025
Compliance of post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) following animal bite in Indian population: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Journal of family medicine and primary care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- One Health implementation for rabies elimination in India by 2030: Progress, governance, challenges, and policy alignment.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2026Article
- Pre-exposure prophylaxis as a complementary vaccination strategy to reduce rabies in Kerala, India: a cost-effectiveness modelling study.The Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia · 2026Article
- Compliance towards post-exposure prophylaxis of rabies vaccination among animal bite patients at a tertiary care hospital in Khandwa, Madhya Pradesh: A retrospective study.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- From one-size-fits-all to context-specific: the 10-day observation rule-a need for change.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Heterogeneity of health anxiety in patients following rabies exposure: a latent profile analysis.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rabies is a life-threatening zoonotic disease in India, leading to numerous fatalities annually. Despite the availability of effective post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP), compliance with completing the vaccination regimen remains low, impeding efforts to control and eliminate the disease. This study aimed to assess PEP compliance rates among individuals exposed to rabies in India and identify key factors contributing to non-compliance. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Databases including PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for studies on PEP compliance in India. Eligible studies were community-based or hospital-based and published in English. The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) tool assessed study quality. A random effects model calculated pooled compliance rates, with heterogeneity assessed using the I² statistic and a Chi-square-based Q test. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses, as well as Egger's test, were performed to explore variations and check for publication bias. The analysis included 30 studies, with a pooled compliance rate of 57% and high heterogeneity (I² =99.69%). Compliance was higher with the intradermal (ID) regimen than the intramuscular (IM) regimen, though adherence decreased over time. Economic constraints, logistical challenges, lack of awareness, cultural beliefs, and fear of side effects were major barriers to completion. Compliance was higher among those with severe bites. PEP compliance in India is low, hindered by various barriers. The ID regimen showed better adherence but also faced declining compliance over time. Improving PEP adherence requires targeted interventions such as education, logistical support, and promoting shorter ID regimens.
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.