Knowledge, Attitudes and Practices on Rabies among Human and Animal Health Professionals in Senegal
, Ndèye Mbacké Kane 2, Mamadou Kindi Korka Diallo 1, Oumar Bassoum 1, Oumy Kaltome Boh 2, Fatoumata Zahra Mohamed Mboup 2, El Hadji Bilal Faye 3, Andre Pouwedeou Bedekelabou 4,5, Sara Danièle Dieng 5,6, Fatimata Niang Diop 6, Médoune Badiane 7, Valéry Ridde 3 and Adama Faye 1Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear authors
Congratulations for the interesting work done.
There are very few comments to improve the information already provided.
Please see the pdf with the respective comments, Will be very happy to review the updated version.
Regards
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear reviewer.
Thank you for the very interesting comments. Please find the answers in the word file.
Sincerely
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors present novel findings about the knowledge, attitudes and practices on rabies among health professionals in Senegal. This is a very clear and well-structured paper, and offers a valuable contribution to the field. I look forward to seeing this published. Just a few minor comments detailed below:
Introduction:
Very clear and well-written introduction. Provides a good overview of background literature and a strong rationale for conducting the study.
One minor comment: Line 64 – ‘based on the premise that knowledge will increase attitudes’, the word ‘increase’ is vague, can possibly rephase to ‘improve’?
Materials and methods:
Please include more detail on how participants were recruited – researcher-based identification, self-selection via adverts, etc.?
Also include detail about ethical approval if sought, and how informed consent was provided by health care professionals to participate (i.e. was a consent form provided? Was consent just verbal?)
Results:
The authors state in the methods that a total of 102 professionals were eligible, but the participation rate indicates 95 participated. I would suggest briefly summarising why the other 7 participants did not participate.
‘Professional’ is spelt incorrectly in Table 2.
Discussion:
The authors indicate that the findings show animal health workers were 7.45 times more likely to have sufficient knowledge about rabies than human health workers (line 321 – 322). This is an interesting finding, but would suggest to include a limitation in the discussion about the imbalance of professional role (with the majority of the sample being human health professionals). This is something that should be acknowledged within the discussion.
Author Response
Dear reviewer.
Thank you for the very interesting comments. Please find the answers in the word file.
Sincerely
