ReviewPublic health in practice (Oxford, England)2026
A structured framework for the development of knowledge, attitudes, and practices surveys addressing brown dog tick-associated Rocky Mountain spotted fever.
Review in Public health in practice (Oxford, England), 2026. 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.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Rocky Mountain spotted fever (RMSF) is a severe tick-borne disease with high fatality rates in endemic regions, particularly where brown dog ticks proliferate. This study proposes a structured framework for developing surveys addressing knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) related to preventive measures in RMSF. Study design: Systematic review. Methods: We searched major scientific databases using MeSH/DeCS terms and keywords related to "health knowledge, attitudes, practice" and "Rocky Mountain spotted fever", combined with relevant synonyms and Boolean operators, for studies published between 2003 and 2024 in English, Spanish, and Portuguese. Following PRISMA guidelines, eight eligible studies were identified and assessed with the AXIS tool. Results: While existing studies offered valuable insights, our assessment revealed four significant biases that compromised their methodological quality and the reliability of their findings. To address these limitations, we propose a novel, structured framework for developing future RMSF KAP surveys. This framework integrates: (a) comprehensive risk assessment, (b) a primary prevention stratification pyramid, and (c) a robust logic model. Conclusions: Applying this proposed framework is anticipated to improve the methodological rigor, validity, and reliability of future KAP studies concerning RMSF preventive measures, ultimately enhancing public health interventions.
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.