ArticleOsong public health and research perspectives2012
Application of the microagglutination test for serologic diagnosis of human brucellosis.
Article in Osong public health and research perspectives, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Brucellosis in the omics era: integrative perspectives on Brucella genomic architecture, host-pathogen interactions, and disease dynamics.World journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2025Review
- Two cases of MPO-ANCA-positive hypertrophic pachymeningitis mimicking as intracranial infection.BMC neurology · 2024Article
- New insights into the genetic predisposition of brucellosis and its effect on the gut and vaginal microbiota in goats.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Review
- Microbiological Laboratory Diagnosis of Human Brucellosis: An Overview.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Comparative Evaluation of Nested Polymerase Chain Reaction for Rapid Diagnosis of Human Brucellosis.Archives of Razi Institute · 2021Article
- Bovine brucellosis - a comprehensive review.The veterinary quarterly · 2021Review
- The spatiotemporal distribution of human brucellosis in mainland China from 2007-2016.BMC infectious diseases · 2020Article
- Laboratory Diagnosis of Human Brucellosis.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2019Review
- Seroreactivity and Risk Factors Associated with Human Brucellosis among Cattle Slaughterhouse Workers in South Korea.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Article
- Outbreak of human brucellosis in Southern Brazil and historical review of data from 2009 to 2018.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2018Article
- Incidence of human brucellosis in the Kilimanjaro Region of Tanzania in the periods 2007-2008 and 2012-2014.Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene · 2018Article
- Real-time PCR assays for diagnosing brucellar spondylitis using formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues.Medicine · 2018Observational
- Evaluation and Selection of Multilocus Variable-Number Tandem-Repeat Analysis Primers for Genotyping Brucella abortus Biovar 1 Isolated from Human Patients.Osong public health and research perspectives · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesBrucellosis is one of the most common zoonoses in the world, and occurs mainly in farmers, slaughterhouse workers, and veterinarians via direct or indirect contact with infected animals or their products. The clinical symptoms of human brucellosis are nonspecific, such as fever, headache, chills, and sweating. Diagnosis and treatment of brucellosis requires laboratory tests. Although the serum tube agglutination test (SAT) is the standardized gold method, it is laborious, time consuming, and requires a number of reagents. A microagglutination test (MAT) variant of the SAT or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) is recommended for serological diagnoses. For the simple and rapid diagnosis of brucellosis, the MAT was standardized using samples for the SAT to define positive and negative categories, and we then compared the sensitivity and specificity of the MAT and ELISA.
methodsThirty SAT-positive sera and 60 SAT-negative sera were used in this study. Antibody titers of ≥1:160 were considered positive readings in both the SAT and MAT. Brucella abortus antigens and Brucella-positive control antiserum were used in the SAT and MAT. ELISAs of IgM and IgG were performed according to the manufacturers' instructions.
resultsThe titers of the MAT differed according to antigen concentration. The optimal concentration of B abortus antigen was determined to compare the sensitivity and specificity between the MAT and SAT. The sensitivity and specificity of the MAT were 93.3% and 96.7%, respectively, for IgG with reference to ELISA, and 96.7% and 98.3%, respectively, for IgM.
conclusionsThe optimal concentration of antigen for the MAT was 1:10. The MAT is less time consuming and requires less antigen and serum than the SAT. The results of the MAT showed good agreement with those of ELISA. The results of this study suggest that the MAT could be useful for diagnosis of brucellosis.
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.