Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32925904›Full record

ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2020

Practical and effective diagnosis of animal anthrax in endemic low-resource settings.

Olubunmi R Aminu, Tiziana Lembo, Ruth N Zadoks, Roman Biek, Suzanna Lewis, Ireen Kiwelu, Blandina T Mmbaga, Deogratius Mshanga, Gabriel Shirima, Matt Denwood and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. InvestigatingbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Identification ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. The Biosafety Research Road Map: The Search for Evidence to Support Practices in the Laboratory-Applied biosafety : journal of the American Biological Safety Association · 2023
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Population genomics ofMicrobial genomics · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
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

11 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Olubunmi R AminuInstitute of Biodiversity, Animal Health and Comparative Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-5930-3151
Tiziana LemboInstitute of Biodiversity, Animal Health and Comparative Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-6405-1849
Ruth N ZadoksInstitute of Biodiversity, Animal Health and Comparative Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1164-8000
Roman BiekInstitute of Biodiversity, Animal Health and Comparative Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3471-5357
Suzanna LewisPublic Health England, Porton Down, Salisbury, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-5714-3430
Ireen KiweluKilimanjaro Clinical Research Institute, Kilimanjaro Christian Medical Centre, Moshi, Tanzania.
Blandina T MmbagaKilimanjaro Clinical Research Institute, Kilimanjaro Christian Medical Centre, Moshi, Tanzania.ORCID 0000-0002-5550-1916
Deogratius MshangaTanzania Veterinary Laboratory Agency, Northern Zone, Arusha, Tanzania.
Gabriel ShirimaNelson Mandela African Institution of Science and Technology, Arusha, Tanzania.
Matt DenwoodDepartment of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0001-5212-4273
Taya L FordeInstitute of Biodiversity, Animal Health and Comparative Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9058-7826
University of Glasgow · GBKilimanjaro Christian Medical Centre · TZNelson Mandela African Institution of Science and Technology · TZPublic Health England · GBTanzania National Parks · TZUniversity of Copenhagen · DK

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council FORDE/BB/R012075/1Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust SBF002\1168
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Anthrax threatens human and animal health, and people's livelihoods in many rural communities in Africa and Asia. In these areas, anthrax surveillance is challenged by a lack of tools for on-site detection. Furthermore, cultural practices and infrastructure may affect sample availability and quality. Practical yet accurate diagnostic solutions are greatly needed to quantify anthrax impacts. We validated microscopic and molecular methods for the detection of Bacillus anthracis in field-collected blood smears and identified alternative samples suitable for anthrax confirmation in the absence of blood smears. We investigated livestock mortalities suspected to be caused by anthrax in northern Tanzania. Field-prepared blood smears (n = 152) were tested by microscopy using four staining techniques as well as polymerase chain reaction (PCR) followed by Bayesian latent class analysis. Median sensitivity (91%, CI 95% [84-96%]) and specificity (99%, CI 95% [96-100%]) of microscopy using azure B were comparable to those of the recommended standard, polychrome methylene blue, PMB (92%, CI 95% [84-97%] and 98%, CI 95% [95-100%], respectively), but azure B is more available and convenient. Other commonly-used stains performed poorly. Blood smears could be obtained for <50% of suspected anthrax cases due to local customs and conditions. However, PCR on DNA extracts from skin, which was almost always available, had high sensitivity and specificity (95%, CI 95% [90-98%] and 95%, CI 95% [87-99%], respectively), even after extended storage at ambient temperature. Azure B microscopy represents an accurate diagnostic test for animal anthrax that can be performed with basic laboratory infrastructure and in the field. When blood smears are unavailable, PCR using skin tissues provides a valuable alternative for confirmation. Our findings lead to a practical diagnostic approach for anthrax in low-resource settings that can support surveillance and control efforts for anthrax-endemic countries globally.

Indexed as

Health ResourcesAnimal DiseasesAnimalsAnthraxBacillus anthracisBayes TheoremDiagnostic Tests, RoutineLivestockMicroscopyPolymerase Chain ReactionSensitivity and SpecificityStaining and LabelingTanzaniaWorkflow

Identifiers

PMID32925904
PMCPMC7513992
OpenAlexW3085528706

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.