ArticleClinical and experimental vaccine research2025
A prospective study on safety and clinical efficacy of rabies biologicals in paediatric patients with category III animal exposure.
Article in Clinical and experimental vaccine research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comprehensive genomic analysis of rabies virus in India reveals distinct lineages and evolutionary stability.Virus genes · 2026Article
- A post-marketing surveillance study of a human rabies vaccine in China (2020-2024).Frontiers in public health · 2026Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Rabies remains a significant public health concern worldwide, particularly among paediatric populations who are vulnerable to animal exposures. This prospective study aimed to assess the safety and clinical efficacy of rabies biologicals in pediatric patients following category III animal exposures. Materials and Methods: A prospective study was undertaken enrolling 289 pediatric patients fulfilling eligibility criteria who presented with category III animal exposures at the anti-rabies clinic of Kempegowda Institute of Medical Sciences Hospital and Research Centre, Bangalore. All the subjects received rabies biologicals as per National Centre for Disease Control guidelines. The details pertaining to socio-demographic profile, biting animal, characteristics of wound, and details of post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) provided were recorded. All the study subjects were followed up for immediate and delayed adverse events (AEs). Subsequently, all were followed up for 6 months to demonstrate the clinical efficacy of PEP. Results: The mean age of study subjects was 9.4 years, and most of them (43%) were going to school. Dog was the predominant biting animal (96.6%) with most bites being abrasions (45%), mainly on the lower limbs (42%). Single rabies monoclonal antibody was the most commonly administered passive immunization (67%), and purified Vero cell rabies vaccine was the predominant vaccine (65%). AEs following PEP were primarily local, predominantly pain (13.2%), and there were no systemic events. All the subjects were alive and healthy at the end of 6 months following PEP. Conclusion: This study contributes valuable insights into the safety and clinical efficacy of rabies biologicals in a pediatric cohort following category III animal exposures, supporting the continued use of these biologicals in pediatric patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.