Descriptive study of cattle and dog rabies cases in the Sheki-Zagatala region of Azerbaijan (2015-2016): Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of people towards rabies.

Every year, rabies causes great damage to human health and the economy of countries around the world. This neurotropic and zoonotic viral disease is endemic to Azerbaijan. This study describes cattle and dog rabies cases identified between 2015 and 2016. In addition, a questionnaire was administered to 100 respondents comprised of case owners, and non-case animal owners, to assess knowledge, attitudes, and practices within this population. The study demonstrates a general lack of knowledge of rabies in the participating communities. The majority of respondents were familiar with rabies and understood that animal bites are a source of transmission. However, many respondents did not know that rabies is preventable and admitted not knowing additional routes of transmission. In addition, there was less perceived risk with contact with animal saliva. Despite free vaccinations in Azerbaijan, only 27 out of 45 dogs in this study were vaccinated. Although educational programming and preventive vaccination of dogs has been implemented, and significant progress has been made in the sphere of epidemiological surveillance and prevention, rabies cases remain problematic in the Sheki-Zagatala region. Regular educational programs for communities, strengthening of the existing vaccination programs, and a comprehensive epidemiological case-control study to identify the disease risk factors could help reduce the burden of rabies in Azerbaijan.

Introduction

Rabies is a viral disease of the central nervous system caused by a virus belonging to the Rhabdoviridae family and Lyssavirus genus [1]. Infection of humans and animals occurs through direct contact with the virus: as a result of a bite or contact of saliva with damaged skin or mucous membranes, other inoculation routes are rare [2,3]. The virus replicates in muscle tissue and travels up the central nervous system which causes infection of the brain (encephalitis and paralysis) [4]. Dogs are a major source of human rabies [5]. Rabid dog manifests the symptoms of hypersalivation, aggressiveness and biting, paralysis, difficulty walking or circular walk, ataxia, glassy eyes and difficulty breathing and swallowing [6]. Encephalitic (furious) or paralytic (dumb) clinical forms of rabies occur at an approximate ratio of 2:1 in both humans and dogs [5,7].

Human rabies remains a major public health problem in the world. Although effective human and animal vaccines are widely available for its prevention and control, each year about 10 million people receive post exposure rabies vaccination [8,9]. Globally, an estimated 59,000 human deaths are caused by rabies each year, especially in Asia and Africa with dogs causing > 99% of these cases. [3,10].

Despite the adoption and implementation of rabies elimination strategies by many countries, rabies remains problematic. Over 1 million animals die from rabies every year, causing enormous economic damage that is estimated at millions of US dollars annually [11,12]. Due to effects on livestock, the social and economic impacts of rabies is increasing. Also, the spread of rabies in wild animal populations is contributing to epizootics in farm animals, especially in cattle [13].

Although rabies is a notifiable disease in Azerbaijan and controlled by vaccination, cases continue to increase among people and animals. In recent years, the preventive vaccination of dogs and cats are carried out in a planned manner [14]. Between 2015 and 2016, approximately 465,000 animals were vaccinated against rabies (1,217,559 animals from 2012 through 2016). In addition, oral vaccination of wild animals was conducted in select forests and suburbs in 2015. However, there were 9 human rabies cases and 66 animal rabies cases from Jan 1, 2015 through Aug 14, 2016 registered throughout Azerbaijan. This includes 26 farm animals (large and small ruminants), 33 dogs, and 7 wild animals (5 jackals and 2 wolves) [15,16].

In 2013 and 2014, the Azerbaijan Ministry of Health and Ministry of Agriculture conducted educational programs in the Sheki-Zagatala region that focused on improving people’s knowledge on rabies. These included information on rabies disease, routes of transmission, protective measures for humans and animals, and rabies vaccine efficacy. Because Sheki-Zagatala is proximal to forests and accompanying wildlife population, and because jackals were found positive for rabies, oral vaccination of wildlife was included in the 2015 vaccination program. However, from 2013–2016, 30% (42/139) of all animal cases in Azerbaijan still came from the Skeki-Zagatala region.

This study describes the epidemiological profile of animal rabies cases in the Sheki-Zagatala region from 2015–2016. The objectives of this study are to assess the community knowledge, attitudes, and practices of the residents of Sheki-Zagatala region and provide a case for the need of a larger national-level study to assess risk factors and provide further guidance to public health leaders in Azerbaijan.

Materials and methods

Study area

The study was conducted from August 11–19, 2016 in northwest region of Azerbaijan in Sheki-Zagatala. The region borders Russia on the north and Georgia on the West. Almost 27% of the region is covered by forest. Agriculture is the primary basis of the economy in this region, producing 9.1% of the country’s agricultural products.

Study design and data collection

The confirmed cattle and dog rabies cases in Sheki-Zagatala region occurring between Jan. 1, 2015 through Aug. 14, 2016 were taken from the Republican Veterinary Laboratory (RVL) database. Additional cases were classified as probable cases based on their epidemiological link to confirmed rabies cases (date of onset, common herd, common owners, common pastures, etc.) and clinical symptoms such as aggressiveness, anorexia, pupil enlargement, glassy eyes, hyperactivity, spumescent discharge.

No ethics or approval by an IRB was requested for this study. The study participants were informed about the study and verbal consent was obtained from all participants prior the interview. The abstracted/collected data was properly stored and secured. The questionnaire survey was conducted among 100 cattle and dog owners, including owners of confirmed rabid animals taken from RVL database, by face-to-face interview. The questionnaire was designed to collect demographic information and information about the respondents’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices of rabies; treatment; and prevention practices.

The latitude and longitude of the animal rabies cases in this study were obtained using Google Maps. The GPS coordinates were used to construct a map using an open-source tool from OpenStreetMap.

Results

Characteristics of dog and cattle cases

We identified a total of 20 dog and cattle rabies cases. Cases were comprised of an initial 14 cases extracted from RVL database (9 cattle/5 dogs) and supplemented by another 6 (2 cattle/4 dogs) probable cases identified during the study through epidemiological links, symptoms of death, and date of onset of disease.

Cases among dogs

Table 1 describes the 9 dog cases where 6 roamed untethered in the community. None of the dogs had a registration number. Five of these 9 dogs were bitten, including 3 dogs that had been vaccinated. All 9 of the dogs died.

Table 1

Description of cases of rabies in dogs and cattle.

Dogs	n = 9	Cattle	n = 11
Animal registration number		Animal registration number
Yes	0	Yes	0
No	9	No	11
Age of the animal		Age of the animal
3–18 months	2	< 3 months	1
18 months—4 years	6	3–18 months	3
>4 years	1	18 months—4 years	3
		>4 years	4
Dog kept condition		Type of movement
Chained in the backyard	1	Herd-type	7
Is not chained, but never leaves the backyard	2	Seasonal movement	3
Always goes out from the backyard	4	Is not moving, always in the pen	1
Goes with cattle to the pasture	1
Hunting dog	1
		Type of pasture
		Common	6
		Surrounded	3
		No pasture	2
		Livestock graze alone or together with other animals
		Alone	3
		With other animals	8
		Location of pastures
		Near the forest	7
		Near the open area-field	4
		Vaccination against any diseases
		Yes	9
		No	2
Vaccination against rabies		Vaccination against rabies
Yes	3	Yes	3
No	6	No	8
Type of rabies vaccination		Type of rabies vaccination
Mandatory	0	Mandatory	3
Preventive	3	Preventive	0
Animal bitten by any animal		Animal bitten by any animal
Yes	5	Yes	7
No	2	No	1
I don’t remember	2	I don’t remember	3
Bitten by which animal?		Bitten by which animal
Jackal	1	Jackal	3
Wolf	0	Wolf	0
Rat	0	Rat	0
Fox	0	Fox	0
Dog or Stray dog	1	Dog or Stray dog	3
Do not know	3	Do not know	1
Geographic District (# of villages)		Geographic District (# of villages)
Zagatala (9)	3	Zagatala (9)	2
Sheki (14)	3	Sheki (14)	3
Gakh (16)	2	Gakh (16)	6
Balaken (3)	1	Balaken (3)	0

Cases among cattle

Table 1 also describes the 11 cases in cattle; none had a registration number. Three cattle separately grazed alone. The other eight cases came from independent herds. Seven out of 11 cases were animals that grazed near forests. Nine of these 11 cattle were vaccinated against Anthrax, Lumpy Skin Disease (LSD) and Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD). Among eleven cases, seven cattle were bitten and all of them died. This includes 3 animals that were vaccinated after receiving bites.

In total, 12 of these 20 animal cases were confirmed to have been bitten. Four of these bites came from Jackals and 4 came from dogs. For the other 4 animals, the owners did not know what animal bit their animals, but wounds were consistent with bites (lesions on body, scratches, incisions, bruises etc.). Only 6 of the animals were vaccinated against rabies. Three dogs received pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) rabies vaccination; 3 cattle got post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) vaccination after being bitten. All of them have died.

The GPS locations of the 20 dog and cattle cases are shown in Fig 1. These identified cases represent 30% (20 out of 65) of all dog and cattle cases in Azerbaijan during this time period.

Fig 1

Registered cattle and dog rabies cases in Sheki-Zagatala districts for 2015 and 2016.

Base map and data from OpenStreetMap and OpenStreetMap Foundation.

Of the 20-animal case-owners surveyed, observed symptoms were consistent with clinical diagnosis. The breakdown of clinical signs and symptoms by animal type is shown in Fig 2. Foamy mouth discharge (60%), an aversion to food (40%), and difficulty swallowing (35%) were among the most reported symptoms.

Fig 2

Most common reported symptoms for rabid cattle and dogs by animal owners (N = 20).

Demographics of questionnaire respondents in the Sheki-Zagatala region

Among 100 questionnaire respondents, 69 were males. The ages for the majority of the respondents fell within the range of 30–49 (29 persons) and 50–69 (53 persons) years old. With respect to education level, 7 had completed primary education, which is about 3-years of school in Azerbaijan, and 78 attended or had not completed high school. Only 15 respondents went further for higher education (Table 2).

Table 2

Demographic characterization of respondents.

Characteristics	Respondents N = 100
Gender
Male	69
Female	31
Age
<30	6
30–49	29
50–69	53
>70	12
Education level
Elementary	7
High school (incomplete, complete)	78
Higher education (incomplete, complete)	15

Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of residents in the Sheki-Zagatala region

As indicated in Table 3, almost all respondents (94 out of 100) were familiar with the rabies disease. The majority were aware that dog bites (97) and cattle bites (91) are risks for exposure to the rabies virus and would attend to the doctor and be vaccinated if advised. The majority (80) of respondents are aware that human and domestic animals can be affected by rabies. Most animal owners understand that rabies is preventable through vaccination but only 64 indicated a preference of vaccination over animal isolation.

Table 3

Assessment of knowledge, attitudes, and practices of the respondents on rabies (N = 100).

Question	Respondents
	N = 100
Q1. Do you know what the disease rabies is?
Yes	94
No	6
Q2. If a dog or cat bites you?
I’ll go to the doctor, and if he advises, I’ll be vaccinated	97
I will go to the doctor, but I will not be vaccinated, despite his advice	1
I don’t pay attention; it happens so often	0
I will take care of the damage by myself at home, on my own	2
Q3. If a cow bites you?
I’ll go to the doctor, and if he advises, I’ll be vaccinated	91
I will go to the doctor, but I will not be vaccinated, despite his advice	0
I don’t pay attention; it happens so often	4
I will take care of the damage by myself at home, on my own	5
Q4. If you have contact with the saliva of a dog or cat?
I’ll go to the doctor, and if he advises, I’ll be vaccinated	60
I will go to the doctor, but I will not be vaccinated, despite his advice	0
I don’t pay attention; it happens so often	16
I will take care of the damage by myself at home, on my own	24
Q5. If you have contact with the saliva of a cow?
I’ll go to the doctor, and if he advises, I’ll be vaccinated	52
I will go to the doctor, but I will not be vaccinated, despite his advice	1
I don’t pay attention; it happens so often	21
I will take care of the damage by myself at home, on my own	26
Q6. What animals may be infected by rabies?
Cattle	85
Sheep	63
Goat	57
Horse	47
Pig	61
Dog	92
Cat	68
Human	80
I don’t know	3
Q7. Is it possible to prevent animal from contracting rabies?
Yes	74
No	14
I don’t know	12
Q7a. If yes, how?
Vaccination	64
Keep them isolated	10
Q8. In case of free vaccination, would you vaccinate your animals against rabies?
Yes	94
No	6
Q9. Will you vaccinate your animals against rabies if you have to pay for a vaccine?
Yes	87
No	6
I don’t know	7
Q10. How would you prefer to get information about rabies?
TV	53
Newspaper/magazines	12
From the vet	66
Through Consulting Center	5
Other	15 (books, internet, neighbor, during practice, etc.)

Respondents indicated a preference to receiving information and knowledge about rabies from veterinarians (66) and by television programs on rabies (53). Fewer respondents indicated a preference for learning about rabies through newspapers, consulting centers, or internet resources.

Knowledge on rabies transmission

Given a multiple-choice question (N = 100) on the transmission of rabies, respondents chose bites (n = 96), saliva (83), scratch (67), abrasion (37) and skin contact (25) as the main modes of transmission for rabies (Table 4). Few cattle owners considered milking, consumption of milk or dairy, and consumption of meat (3) as a mode of transmission from large ruminants. Similarly, few animal owners considered rabies transmission through air droplets, urine, and feces (7). In total, 21 respondents indicated that they did not know how rabies is transmitted.

Table 4

Respondent knowledge about rabies transmission (N = 100).

Transmission ways	Transmitted from cattle	Transmitted from dogs
Bites	20	76
Saliva	54	29
Scratch	40	27
Abrasion	20	17
Skin contact	17	8
Milking	5	N/A
Consumption of milk or dairy	3	N/A
Consumption of meat	3	N/A
Contact with wild animal (or sick and dead wild animals)	2	5
Air droplets	3	2
Feces	0	1
Urine	0	1
Do not know	10	11

Discussion

Based on the questionnaire, it is clear that study participants from the Sheki-Zagatala region lack specific knowledge on rabies transmission, risk factors, and perceived seriousness of the disease. Bites and contact with animal saliva were correctly indicated as a means of transmission of the disease by a majority of respondents. However, there is less perceived risk associated with contact of dog and cattle saliva. In addition, 26 respondents did not believe, or understand, that animal rabies is preventable. Another 22 respondents indicated that they did not fully understand how rabies is transmitted.

The Sheki-Zagatala region is known for its proximity to the forest and wildlife. Based on RVL data domestic animals such as dogs, cats, cattle, and wild animals such as jackals and wolves are a common source and cause of rabies in Azerbaijan [14]. Respondents indicated these animals, together with pigs, horses, sheep, and goats as a cause of rabies. Despite the fact that pigs are not common in Azerbaijan, they were mentioned by 61 respondents as source of rabies.

Three rabies case-owners within this study (1 dog, 3 cattle) claimed that jackals were responsible for their animals’ deaths. The RVL also confirmed rabies in 7 jackals and two wolves within 2015–2016. In addition, 13 respondents confirmed seeing dead jackals next to the pastures within the study area. Furthermore, 35 respondents saw wild animals near the pastures, and 63 saw wild animals near the villages. The location of pastures near forests was reported as risk factor by a previously conducted study in Azerbaijan [17]. A future and larger case-control study aimed at assessing the added risk of wild animals on rabies cases in Azerbaijan would be warranted. The study might compare this risk in the Skeki-Zagatala region to other regions in Azerbaijan.

The Azerbaijan Ministry of Agriculture provides free rabies vaccinations throughout the country for dogs and cats registered by veterinarians. Annual vaccinations are administered to dogs which require three vaccinations over a three-year period. The process involves veterinarians visiting each household with registered animals. However, owners are responsible for registering their animals. Despite such facilities, only 27 (60%) of the dogs in this study had preventative vaccination. Interestingly, 3 of the dogs that received a preventative vaccination were identified as case dogs and died. However, there was perceived recall bias associated with vaccination of the study animals. Three dog owners claimed that their vaccinated dogs were bitten and died. One dog was bitten by a stray dog and died without developing any rabies related symptoms; a second dog had scratches, he developed aggressiveness to owner, glassy eyes, aversion to food, foamy month, difficulty swallowing, shiver, and died; a third dog had scratches and the owner did not follow later developments, the animal was found dead. The respondents were asked to specify the exact date of the rabies vaccination of their dogs, but none of them could answer. The veterinarians were contacted in order to clarify the date of administration of pre-exposure prophylaxis rabies vaccination to case dogs. The veterinarians clarified that none of the dogs had completed their full vaccination programs and that rabies vaccinations were not current. Additionally, three cattle in the study received post-exposure prophylaxis rabies vaccine after being bitten by jackals (2) and a dog (1), but all died. All three developed some precent of rabies related symptoms–neurological, aggressiveness to owner, aversion to food, glassy eyes, foamy month, difficulty swallowing, shiver, ataxia, head itching, itching, and walking in circular patterns. The problem could be either late administration of the vaccine (after 72 hours from being bitten) or there was a lethal bite to the head. The owners didn’t clarify these points. We suspect that vaccine-related problems in cattle and dogs are related to gaps in knowledge. Veterinarians are also responsible for providing enough information to animal owners on how frequently and when to vaccinate their animals. Thus, there is also a need for a strong program.

In addition, this study revealed 6 probable cases that went unreported, identified through epidemiological links, symptoms of death, and date of onset of disease. We hypothesize that this is a result of a low overall level of knowledge about the disease, low perceived severity of the disease, and may also be due to limited access to testing, which is 400km away from Sheki-Zagatala. As such, we suspect that rabies cases are underreported in Azerbaijan.

Through the current study we were able to learn about issues that may be impacting rabies cases in Azerbaijan. These issues include access to veterinary care, the potential role of wild animal populations (7 rabid jackals and wolves confirmed by the RVL; respondents’ observations of dead wild animals near pastures), incomplete vaccination program, knowledge on transmission, and deficiencies in knowledge about the signs and symptoms of rabies. However, we cannot make any generalization or come up with decision on spread of rabies with the limited number of animals (20) and the limited number of people (100) involved in this study. Despite preventive measures conducted in this region, including a dog vaccination program, rabies cases continue to occur in Sheki-Zagatala. Generally, there is an inadequate level of awareness about rabies and insufficient adoption of rabies control measures among study participants. Regular educational programs for this community would help. The vaccination program could also be strengthened to better control the spread in both domestic and wild animals. Ultimately, a more extensive study that includes more people and more animals is needed to make fully assess peoples’ knowledge about rabies and to identify risk-factors most relevant to the spread of rabies in Azerbaijan.

2 Oct 2020

PONE-D-20-26983

Descriptive study of animal rabies cases in Sheki-Zagatala region of Azerbaijan for 2015-2016

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Garayusifova

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

==============================

Many thanks for submitting your manuscript to PLOS One

Your manuscript was reviewed by two experts in the field, who have recommended some changes be made prior to acceptance

I therefore invite you to make these changes, and write a response to reviewers to expedite re-review when you resubmit.

I wish you the best of luck with your revisions

Hope you are keeping safe and well in these difficult times

Thanks

Simon

==============================

Please submit your revised manuscript by Nov 16 2020 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Simon Clegg, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. We note you have included a table to which you do not refer in the text of your manuscript. Please ensure that you refer to Table 4 in your text; if accepted, production will need this reference to link the reader to the Table.

3.We note that [Figure(s) 1] in your submission contain [map/satellite] images which may be copyrighted. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For these reasons, we cannot publish previously copyrighted maps or satellite images created using proprietary data, such as Google software (Google Maps, Street View, and Earth). For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission:

1.    You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figure(s) [1] to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license.

We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:

“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.”

Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an "Other" file with your submission.

In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].”

2.    If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.

The following resources for replacing copyrighted map figures may be helpful:

USGS National Map Viewer (public domain): http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/

The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth (public domain): http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/clickmap/

Maps at the CIA (public domain): https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html and https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/cia-maps-publications/index.html

NASA Earth Observatory (public domain): http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/

Landsat: http://landsat.visibleearth.nasa.gov/

USGS EROS (Earth Resources Observatory and Science (EROS) Center) (public domain): http://eros.usgs.gov/#

Natural Earth (public domain): http://www.naturalearthdata.com/

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: N/A

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: In addition to the review comments attached, the authors have selected two groups for interviewing. If the authors intend to compare the two groups then why haven't they performed a statistical analysis for the same? If the intention is not to compare the two groups then the groups can be merged.

Reviewer #2: The manuscript provides important information about rabies in Azerbaijan and authors suggested the further action for controlling rabies in the countries, however the manuscript needs to be improved before considering its publication.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Submitted filename: PONE_Review.docx

Click here for additional data file.

Submitted filename: PLOS One rabies in Azerbaijan_2015-2016_Review.docx

Click here for additional data file.

12 Feb 2021

1. Ensure manuscript meets PLOS ONE’s style requirements, including those for file naming

• Thank you for helping us ensure we have the correct formatting and style elements. We have updated the manuscript to ensure that it meets all style requirements for each section.

2. Table 4 was not referenced in the text of the manuscript

• Thank you for catching this. We discussed the table but failed to reference the table. We have updated the manuscript to include a reference to the table in our discussion (page 18, line 204 in Revised Manuscript with Track Changes).

3. The map contains images which may be copyrighted.

• Thank you for helping us understand this issue and for the helpful tips on developing a new map. We have generated a new map using an open-source tool from OpenStreetMap®. Documentation is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 license (CC BY-SA 2.0). As such, we have the credited OpenStreetMap as and its contributors as required in the “Study design and data collection” subsection of the Materials and Methods (Page 7, Line 127-128).

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Click here for additional data file.

2 Mar 2021

Descriptive study of cattle and dog rabies cases in the Sheki-Zagatala region of Azerbaijan (2015-2016): Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of people towards rabies

PONE-D-20-26983R1

Dear Dr. Garayusifova,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Simon Clegg, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments:

Many thanks for resubmitting your manuscript to PLOS One

As you have addressed all the comments and the manuscript reads well, I have recommended it for publication

You should hear from the Editorial Office shortly.

It was a pleasure working with you and I wish you the best of luck for your future research

Hope you are keeping safe and well in these difficult times

Thanks

Simon

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #2: N/A

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #2: The authors revised the manuscript according to the comments made in the previous version.

The current version clearly provide the important findings according to the aims of the study as well as the limitations.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #2: No

8 Nov 2021

PONE-D-20-26983R1

Descriptive study of cattle and dog rabies cases in the Sheki-Zagatala region of Azerbaijan (2015-2016): Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of people towards rabies

Dear Dr. Garayusifova:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Simon Clegg

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE