SynthesisPloS one2012
Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials in the treatment of human brucellosis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 70 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
70 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 162 citations in OpenAlex.
- Treatment of brucellosis in pregnant women: a systematic review and analysis of current gaps and future perspectives.Revista do Instituto de Medicina Tropical de Sao Paulo · 2026Pooled it
- Research mapping and comparative assessment of drug treatment regimens for brucellosis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Pooled it
- A Systematic Review and Analysis of Brucella Endocarditis Cases.Anatolian journal of cardiology · 2025Pooled it
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative clinical studies on antibiotic treatment of brucellosis.Scientific reports · 2024Pooled it
- Updated therapeutic options for human brucellosis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2024Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of therapeutic strategies for human brucellosis: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2024Pooled it
- Better efficacy of triple antibiotics therapy for human brucellosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2023Pooled it
- Rifampicin versus streptomycin for brucellosis treatment in humans: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.PloS one · 2018Pooled it
- Antibiotics for treating human brucellosis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012Pooled it
- The clinical Epidemiological Characteristics and Diagnosis/Treatment of Brucellosis infection Patients in Gansu Province: A retrospective study from 2019 to 2022.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Retrospective Analysis of Epidemiologic, Clinical, and Laboratory Findings of Patients Diagnosed with Brucellosis and Review of the Literature.Infectious diseases & clinical microbiology · 2026Article
- Neurobrucellosis: An Uncommon but Important Cause of Sensorineural Hearing Loss: a case report.Journal of otology · 2026Article
- Article
- Hepatic brucelloma with initially negative antibodies: Diagnostic challenges in an endemic region.IDCases · 2026Article
- FulminantCase reports in infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Review
- Effectiveness and Safety of Dual Versus Triple Antibiotic Therapy for Treating Brucellosis Infection: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Review
- Zoonotic infections of the Canadian Arctic.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2025Review
- Epidemiological, clinical, and laboratory characteristics of 581 human brucellosis cases in Xinjiang, China.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBrucellosis is a persistent health problem in many developing countries throughout the world, and the search for simple and effective treatment continues to be of great importance. METHODS AND
findingsA search was conducted in MEDLINE and in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL). Clinical trials published from 1985 to present that assess different antimicrobial regimens in cases of documented acute uncomplicated human brucellosis were included. The primary outcomes were relapse, therapeutic failure, combined variable of relapse and therapeutic failure, and adverse effect rates. A meta-analysis with a fixed effect model was performed and odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals were calculated. A random effect model was used when significant heterogeneity between studies was verified. Comparison of combined doxycycline and rifampicin with a combination of doxycycline and streptomycin favors the latter regimen (OR = 3.17; CI95% = 2.05-4.91). There were no significant differences between combined doxycycline-streptomycin and combined doxycycline-gentamicin (OR = 1.89; CI95% = 0.81-4.39). Treatment with rifampicin and quinolones was similar to combined doxycycline-rifampicin (OR = 1.23; CI95% = 0.63-2.40). Only one study assessed triple therapy with aminoglycoside-doxycycline-rifampicin and only included patients with uncomplicated brucellosis. Thus this approach cannot be considered the therapy of choice until further studies have been performed. Combined doxycycline/co-trimoxazole or doxycycline monotherapy could represent a cost-effective alternative in certain patient groups, and further studies are needed in the future.
conclusionsAlthough the preferred treatment in uncomplicated human brucellosis is doxycycline-aminoglycoside combination, other treatments based on oral regimens or monotherapy should not be rejected until they are better studied. Triple therapy should not be considered the current treatment of choice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.