ArticleAntimicrobial resistance and infection control2019
Detection of
Article in Antimicrobial resistance and infection control, 2019. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sensitivity of current laboratory methods for brucellosis diagnosis at endemic foci.BMC microbiology · 2026Article
- Integrated clinical and PBMC transcriptomic profiling identifies lipid metabolism-related candidate signatures associated with chronic brucellosis.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Comparative Evaluation of Diagnostic Tests for Brucellosis in Humans and Animals: A Meta-Analytical Approach.Veterinary sciences · 2025Article
- Identification of potential miRNA biomarkers for neurobrucellosis diagnosis.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Article
- Evaluation of Reactivity of Monoclonal Antibodies Against Omp25 ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2020Article
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 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Brucellosis is one of the most severe widespread zoonoses caused by the Gram-negative bacterium Methods: Blood samples and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were collected from 154 patients hospitalized for brucellosis. Results: Among 154 brucellosis patients, 59.7% (92/154) were antibody reactive by RBPT, 81.8% (126/154) by SAT and 95.5% (147/154) by ELISA, respectively. Only 3.2% (5/154) of patient blood samples resulted in positive Conclusions: IFS appears a sensitive assay for detection of
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.