ABSTRACT
Rabies is an important zoonosis in Ethiopia, where lack of research is cited as a constraint to implementation of the national rabies control strategy. We conducted a systematic review of publications and theses on rabies in Ethiopia, to document research gaps and areas of knowledge saturation in relation to geographic and species focus, methods and findings. We also examined funding sources and extent of local researcher participation. After screening titles and abstracts, the full text of 119 publications was included in data extraction. More than 40% of publications involved data collection in one region (Oromia); no publications reported findings from Benishangul-Gumuz, Dire Dawa or Gambella. Dogs and wildlife (especially Canis simensis) were the focus of research in 45% and 24% publications, respectively. Descriptive epidemiology (N = 39 publications), ethno-medicine/-pharmacology (N = 17) and knowledge, attitude, and practice surveys (KAP, N = 15) were amongst the most common study designs, while studies involving economic methods (N = 3) and experimental epidemiology to test interventions (N = 3) were under-represented. Incidence surveys (N = 9) commonly used post-exposure prophylaxis administration in humans as a proxy for exposure without laboratory confirmation of the rabies status of the animal. KAP surveys tended to highlight reasonable levels of knowledge of rabies and poor practices, including overreliance on medicinal plants. International researchers were the first or last (senior) author on 42% and 58% of publications, respectively, most of which were funded by international organizations (45/72 publications reporting funding source). Based on this systematic review, we suggest more applied research is needed to address gaps in laboratory surveillance (including in humans, domestic and wild animals); identify effective ways to overcome socio-cultural and other barriers to accessing effective rabies treatments; inform best approaches to incentivizing mass dog vaccination programs; and generate local estimates of the cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness of different control strategies to improve financing and political buy-in for rabies control in Ethiopia.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: One Health is particularly relevant to the Horn of Africa where many people's livelihoods are highly dependent on livestock and their shared environment. In this context, zoonoses may have a dramatic impact on both human and animal health, but also on country economies. This scoping review aimed to characterise and evaluate the nature of zoonotic disease research in the Horn region. Specifically, it addressed the following questions: (i) what specific zoonotic diseases have been prioritised for research, (ii) what data have been reported (human, animal or environment), (iii) what methods have been applied, and (iv) who has been doing the research? METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We used keyword combinations to search online databases for peer-reviewed papers and theses. Screening and data extraction (disease, country, domain and method) was performed using DistillerSR. A total of 2055 studies focusing on seven countries and over 60 zoonoses were included. Brucellosis attracted the highest attention in terms of research while anthrax, Q fever and leptospirosis have been comparatively under-studied. Research efforts did not always align with zoonoses priorities identified at national levels. Despite zoonoses being a clear target for 'One Health' research, a very limited proportion of studies report data on the three domains of human, animal and environment. Descriptive and observational epidemiological studies were dominant and only a low proportion of publications were multidisciplinary. Finally, we found that a minority of international collaborations were between Global South countries with a high proportion of authors having affiliations from outside the Horn of Africa. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: There is a growing interest in zoonoses research in the Horn of Africa. Recommendations arising from this scoping review include: (i) ensuring zoonoses research aligns with national and global research agendas; (ii) encouraging researchers to adopt a holistic, transdisciplinary One Health approach following high quality reporting standards (COHERE, PRISMA, etc.); and (iii) empowering local researchers supported by regional and international partnerships to engage in zoonoses research.