↓ Skip to main content

Cost Description and Comparative Cost Efficiency of Post-Exposure Prophylaxis and Canine Mass Vaccination against Rabies in N’Djamena, Chad

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Veterinary Science, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
7 news outlets
twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
100 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Cost Description and Comparative Cost Efficiency of Post-Exposure Prophylaxis and Canine Mass Vaccination against Rabies in N’Djamena, Chad
Published in
Frontiers in Veterinary Science, April 2017
DOI 10.3389/fvets.2017.00038
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rolande Mindekem, Monique Sarah Lechenne, Kemdongarti Service Naissengar, Assandi Oussiguéré, Bidjeh Kebkiba, Daugla Doumagoum Moto, Idriss Oumar Alfaroukh, Laurent Tinoanga Ouedraogo, Sahidou Salifou, Jakob Zinsstag

Abstract

Rabies claims approximately 59,000 human lives annually and is a potential risk to 3.3 billion people in over 100 countries worldwide. Despite being fatal in almost 100% of cases, human rabies can be prevented by vaccinating dogs, the most common vector, and the timely administration of post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) to exposed victims. For the control and prevention of human rabies in N'Djamena, the capital city of Chad, a free mass vaccination campaign for dogs was organized in 2012 and 2013. The campaigns were monitored by parallel studies on the incidence of canine rabies based on diagnostic testing of suspect animals and the incidence of human bite exposure recorded at selected health facilities. Based on the cost description of the campaign and the need for PEP registered in health centers, three cost scenarios were compared: cumulative cost-efficiency of (1) PEP alone, (2) dog mass vaccination and PEP, (3) dog mass vaccination, PEP, and maximal communication between human health and veterinary workers (One Health communication). Assuming ideal One Health communication, the cumulative prospective cost of dog vaccination and PEP break even with the cumulative prospective cost of PEP alone in the 10th year from the start of the calculation (2012). The cost efficiency expressed in cost per human exposure averted is much higher with canine vaccination and One Health communication than with PEP alone. As shown in other studies, our cost-effectiveness analysis highlights that canine vaccination is financially the best option for animal rabies control and rabies prevention in humans. This study also provides evidence of the beneficial effect of One Health communication. Only with close communication between the human and animal health sectors will the decrease in animal rabies incidence be translated into a decline for PEP. An efficiently applied One Health concept would largely reduce the cost of PEP in resource poor countries and should be implemented for zoonosis control in general.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 100 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 21 21%
Researcher 17 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 23 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 28 28%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 6%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Other 19 19%
Unknown 26 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 52. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 August 2020.
All research outputs
#687,948
of 22,962,258 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#131
of 6,288 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,807
of 308,921 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Veterinary Science
#1
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,962,258 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,288 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 308,921 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.