ArticleExperimental and therapeutic medicine2015
Article in Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Brucellosis: Bacteriology, pathogenesis, epidemiology and role of the metallophores in virulence: a review.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Review
- Review
- Brucellosis: epidemiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis and treatment-a comprehensive review.Annals of medicine · 2023Review
- Evaluation of Brucellosis Vaccines: A Comprehensive Review.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2022Review
- Evaluation and Differential Diagnosis of a Genetic Marked Brucella Vaccine A19ΔvirB12 for Cattle.Frontiers in immunology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Brucellosis is a zoonotic disease that poses a serious threat to public health and safety. Although the live attenuated vaccines targeting brucellosis, such as M5-90, are effective, there are a number of drawbacks to their use. For example, the vaccines are unable to differentiate between the natural and vaccinated forms of the infection, and these vaccines have also been shown to cause abortion in pregnant animals. Therefore, a safer and more potent vaccine is required. In the present study, a
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.