Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29506522›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2018

Assessing short evolution brucellosis in a highly brucella endemic cattle keeping population of Western Uganda: a complementary use of Rose Bengal test and IgM rapid diagnostic test.

Arnold Ezama, Jean-Paul Gonzalez, Samuel Majalija, Francis Bajunirwe

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. BMJ open · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Bovine brucellosis - a comprehensive review.The veterinary quarterly · 2021
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Molecular identification ofVeterinary research forum : an international quarterly journal · 2019
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Arnold EzamaDepartment of Production and Marketing, Office of the District Veterinary Officer, Sheema District Local Government, P.O. Box 160, Kabwohe, Sheema, Uganda. arnoldezama@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0001-9566-9601
Jean-Paul GonzalezCenter of Excellence for Emerging and Zoonotic Animal Disease (CEEZAD), Kansas State University, Office Park, 1800 Kimball Ave, Suite 130, Manhattan, Kansas, 66502, United States of America.
Samuel MajalijaDepartment of Biosecurity, Ecosystem and Veterinary Public Health, College of Veterinary Medicine, Animal Resources and Biosecurity, Makerere University, 7062, Kampala, Uganda.
Francis BajunirweDepartment of Community Health, Faculty of Medicine, Mbarara University of Science and Technology, P.O. Box 1410, Mbarara, Uganda.
Government of Hungary · HUKansas State University · USMakerere University · UGMbarara University of Science and Technology · UG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBrucellosis is a worldwide and zoonotic disease often sadly misdiagnosed in endemic areas. Challenges of availability and accessibility of diagnostic tools are common in resource constrained populations where the most vulnerable are found, surveillance and diagnosis are limited too.

methodsA cross-sectional study using a simple two stage cluster sampling method was conducted to measure short evolution brucellosis burden among cattle keeping households that are one of the highest risk populations to be exposed to Brucella infection. A total of 216 households were randomly selected from 18 rural villages from the Western Region of Uganda. Household blood samples were tested for Brucella antibodies using the highly sensitive Rose Bengal test (RBT) and IgM ELISA Lateral Flow Assay (LFA).

resultsAmong the total tested population, 58.8% did not react with any of the tests, 13.4% reacted with both tests. Among those that reacted with both (N = 29), 62.1% had weak (+ 1) LFA staining, 34.5% had moderate (2+) LFA staining. Altogether, both weak and moderate staining (96.5%) are consistent with sub-acute disease, while only one (3.4%) had strong (3+) LFA staining consistent with acute infection. 19.4% of the samples tested positive only with RBT, consistent with chronic infection, eighteen samples (8.3%) reacted exclusively with IgM LFA.

conclusionWe identified a high prevalence of short evolution brucellosis in the cattle keeping household members. Prevalence of chronic infection diagnosed with RBT only was higher than the prevalence of short evolution brucellosis. IgM LFA results depict possible cases of cross reaction with Salmonella spp., Plasmodium etc. Ultimately, we identified a consistent prevalence of short evolution brucellosis in the cattle keeping household members. Indeed, the use of a combined diagnostic with LFA and RBT is easy and amenable for an active disease surveillance and accurate diagnosis in rural settings.

Indexed as

Animal HusbandryEndemic DiseasesPopulation SurveillanceAdultAnimalsAntibodies, BacterialBrucellaBrucellosisCattleCross-Sectional StudiesDiagnostic Tests, RoutineEnzyme-Linked Immunosorbent AssayFemaleHumansImmunoglobulin MMaleAntibodies, BacterialImmunoglobulin MRose BengalAssayBengalBrucellaCattleFlowKeepersLateralRoseTestUganda

Identifiers

PMID29506522
PMCPMC5838946
OpenAlexW2799343358

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.