Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42662449›Full record

ArticleCureus2026

Improving Frontline Healthcare Workers' Knowledge of Japanese Encephalitis and Other Vector-Borne Diseases Through a One-Day Interactive Training Programme: A Quasi-experimental Study.

Bijit Biswas, Gurusanganabasava Hawaldar, G Jahnavi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Bijit BiswasCommunity and Family Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Deoghar, IND.
Gurusanganabasava HawaldarCommunity and Family Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Deoghar, IND.
G JahnaviCommunity and Family Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Deoghar, IND.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFrontline healthcare workers (FHWs) are central to vector-borne disease (VBD) prevention and control, but evidence on the effectiveness of routine training programmes remains limited. This study evaluated the effectiveness of a one-day interactive training programme among FHWs in eastern India.

methodsA quasi-experimental single-group pre-test-post-test study was conducted among FHWs in Deoghar, Jharkhand, India. Auxiliary nurse midwives (ANMs) and multi-purpose workers (MPWs) (n = 39) received training on Japanese encephalitis (JE), while community health officers (CHOs) (n = 38) received training on major VBDs. Knowledge was assessed immediately before and after training using validated questionnaires.

resultsMean JE knowledge scores increased from 7.8 ± 3.8 to 17.1 ± 2.8 (mean difference: 9.3; Cohen's d = 1.9; p < 0.001) among ANMs and MPWs, while mean VBD knowledge scores increased from 8.5 ± 4.0 to 15.9 ± 2.6 (mean difference: 7.0; Cohen's d = 1.7; p < 0.001) among CHOs. Correct responses increased significantly for 18 of 20 JE-related knowledge items and 17 of 18 VBD-related knowledge items. Educational level independently predicted greater JE knowledge gain (B = 1.03, 95% CI: 0.34-1.72; p = 0.005), whereas no participant characteristic was associated with knowledge gain among CHOs.

conclusionsA structured one-day interactive training programme substantially improved knowledge of JE and other major VBDs among FHWs. These findings support regular guideline-based refresher training to strengthen frontline capacity for VBD prevention and control.

Indexed as

community health workersencephalitisfrontline healthcare workersindiainservice trainingjapanesejapanese encephalitisknowledgevector-borne diseases

Identifiers

PMID42662449
PMCPMC13519851

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.