ArticleOne health (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2026
A mixed-methods study of community dog management and rabies awareness in Thailand.
Article in One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 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
Rabies elimination requires coordinated interventions across the human-animal-environment interface, yet sustained progress is often hindered by systemic gaps between dog population management, community engagement, and governance. This study investigated community perceptions and challenges related to rabies prevention and control across high-endemic areas in Thailand. Using a mixed-methods design, secondary provincial quantitative data were integrated with qualitative thematic analysis from 57 stakeholders in high endemic areas, including public health officials, policymakers, NGOs, animal-welfare liaisons, and community members. The findings indicated standard rabies awareness, 98.2% of participants demonstrated good preventive practices, recognized post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) as essential, and 68.4% possessed good knowledge. Although most supported dog sterilization (59.6%) and vaccination (63.2%), only 19.3% perceived existing control campaigns as effective. Main challenges included constrained operational resources (57.9%) and limited local government budgets (40.4%). Free-roaming community dogs were prevalent, with 54.4% of participants identifying abandonment as the primary driver of population growth. Informal feeding networks provided localized care for community dogs. While public willingness to fund management was relatively low (33.3% willing to pay; 19.3% supporting co-payment), reflecting an expectation of local authority responsibility. Qualitatively, unclear boundaries between public health mandates and animal welfare legal frameworks added complexity to rabies outbreak response and sometimes introduced institutional challenges among local government and non-governmental sectors. Nevertheless, stakeholders strongly supported sustained sterilization and intersectoral collaboration. Addressing policy-practice gaps, stabilizing financing, and integrating community social dynamics into formal One Health governance are crucial for achieving sustainable rabies elimination.
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.