Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30424746›Full record

ArticleBMC veterinary research2018

Risk factors of brucellosis seropositivity in Bactrian camels of Mongolia.

Chimedtseren Bayasgalan, Tungalag Chultemdorj, Felix Roth, Jakob Zinsstag, Jan Hattendorf, Battsetseg Badmaa, Bayanzul Argamjav, Esther Schelling

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC veterinary research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Prevalence ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2023
    Article
  8. Molecular characterization ofFrontiers in veterinary science · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Frontiers in veterinary science · 2020
    Review
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Chimedtseren BayasgalanSchool of Veterinary Medicine, Mongolian University of Life Sciences, PO Box 17024, Zaisan, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia. chimee_vet@muls.edu.mn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7182-036X
Tungalag ChultemdorjSchool of Veterinary Medicine, Mongolian University of Life Sciences, PO Box 17024, Zaisan, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.
Felix Roth, Basel, Switzerland.
Jakob ZinsstagSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, PO Box, CH-4002, Basel, Switzerland.
Jan HattendorfSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, PO Box, CH-4002, Basel, Switzerland.
Battsetseg BadmaaSchool of Veterinary Medicine, Mongolian University of Life Sciences, PO Box 17024, Zaisan, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.
Bayanzul ArgamjavSchool of Veterinary Medicine, Mongolian University of Life Sciences, PO Box 17024, Zaisan, Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.
Esther SchellingSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, PO Box, CH-4002, Basel, Switzerland.
Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute · CHMongolian University of Life Sciences · MN

Funding

City of Basel-Stadt Stipend commissionDirektion für Entwicklung und Zusammenarbeit Animal Health Project Mongolia
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMore information on brucellosis epidemiology in Bactrian camels is needed due to their growing economic and livelihood importance for herders and renewed efforts in Mongolia to eliminate brucellosis through mass vaccination of ruminants excluding camels. Brucellosis prevalence in camels increased over the past two decades. Random multi-stage cluster surveys were done in the Eastern provinces of Dornod and Sukhbaatar in 2013 and 2014 and in the Southern & Western provinces of Dornogobi, Umnogobi and Khovd in 2014 and 2015. A total of 1822 camels, 1155 cattle, and 3023 small ruminant sera were collected and tested with the Rose Bengal Test. In addition, 195 vaginal swabs and 250 milk samples for bacteriological culture were taken from livestock with history of abortion.

resultsThe overall apparent seroprevalence in camels was 2.3% (95% confidence interval 1.6-3.3). The main risk factor for camel seropositivity was being in an Eastern province when compared to Southern & Western provinces (odds ratio 13.2, 95% CI 5.3-32.4). Camel seroprevalences were stable over the two consecutive survey years, despite introduction of ruminant vaccination: 5.7% (95% CI 3.1-10.2%) and 5.8% (3.3-10.1%) in Eastern provinces and 0.4% (0.2-1.2%) and 0.5% (0.1-2.0%) in Southern & Western provinces. We isolated Brucella abortus from camels and cattle. Camel seropositivity was associated to keeping cattle together with camels. Monitoring of vaccination campaigns showed that coverage in cattle was insufficient because animals could not be adequately restrained.

conclusionsThe present study reveals that brucellosis is present with important seroprevalence in Mongolian camels and was endemic in Eastern provinces. Camel herd seropositivity was most closely associated to infection in cattle. Longer term monitoring is needed to assess whether camel seroprevalance decreases with ongoing vaccination in Mongolia. This should be coupled with further confirmation on Brucella spp. isolates. To date, only Brucella abortus was isolated, but camels are also susceptible to Brucella melitensis. Clear verbal and written information on disease prevention in livestock and household members is important, particularly for remote camel herders who had only moderate knowledge on brucellosis epidemiology and preventive measures.

Indexed as

AnimalsBrucella abortusBrucellosisCamelusCluster AnalysisFemaleMaleMilkMongoliaRisk FactorsSeroepidemiologic StudiesBactrian camelBrucella spp.BrucellosisEpidemiologyMongoliaRisk factorsSeroprevalence

Identifiers

PMID30424746
PMCPMC6234668
OpenAlexW2901489176

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.