INTRODUCTION: Sight-resight studies are performed to estimate population sizes, in this case dog populations in rabies endemic areas.
AIM: This study compares one- and two-day sight-resight methods with two-day as the standard to explore the feasibility and accuracy of the one-day method in different vaccination campaign strategies and dog population characteristics.
METHODS: 2015 household survey data and sight-resight data are analyzed to find the percentage of free roaming and confined dogs in the community and use those to adjust the population estimate formulas. 2016 sight-resight data are analyzed as a two-day campaign and as if it had been a one-day campaign. In a sensitivity analysis, confidence intervals are explored in relation to vaccination coverage.
RESULTS: Before missed mark and proportion free-roaming corrections, the one-day method results in slightly underestimated population estimates to the two-day method when the vaccination campaign is central point, overestimated when door-to-door, and far underestimated when capture, vaccinate, release. After corrections door-to-door estimates were accurate whereas central point and capture, vaccinate, release estimates substantially underestimated population sizes.
DISCUSSION: Results suggest that the one-day mark-resight method could be used to conserve resources depending on the vaccination method and estimated coverage
