Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36512611›Full record

SynthesisPLoS neglected tropical diseases2022

Methodological choices in brucellosis burden of disease assessments: A systematic review.

Carlotta Di Bari, Narmada Venkateswaran, Mieghan Bruce, Christina Fastl, Ben Huntington, Grace T Patterson, Jonathan Rushton, Paul Torgerson, David M Pigott, Brecht Devleesschauwer

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

10 authors.

Carlotta Di BariGBADs programme -, Liverpool, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4061-0818
Narmada VenkateswaranGBADs programme -, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Mieghan BruceGBADs programme -, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Christina FastlGBADs programme -, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Ben HuntingtonGBADs programme -, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Grace T PattersonGBADs programme -, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Jonathan RushtonGBADs programme -, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Paul TorgersonGBADs programme -, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
David M PigottGBADs programme -, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Brecht DevleesschauwerGBADs programme -, Liverpool, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFoodborne and zoonotic diseases such as brucellosis present many challenges to public health and economic welfare. Increasingly, researchers and public health institutes use disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) to generate a comprehensive comparison of the population health impact of these conditions. DALYs calculations, however, entail a number of methodological choices and assumptions, with data gaps and uncertainties to accommodate. Thisreview identifies existing brucellosis burden of disease studies and analyzes their methodological choices, assumptions, and uncertainties. It supports the Global Burden of Animal Diseases programme in the development of a systematic methodology to describe the impact of animal diseases on society, including human health. METHODS/PRINCIPAL

findingsA systematic search for brucellosis burden of disease calculations was conducted in pre-selected international and grey literature databases. Using a standardized reporting framework, we evaluated each estimate on a variety of key methodological assumptions necessary to compute a DALY. Fourteen studies satisfied the inclusion criteria (human brucellosis and quantification of DALYs). One study reported estimates at the global level, the rest were national or subnational assessments. Data regarding different methodological choices were extracted, including detailed assessments of the adopted disease models. Most studies retrieved brucellosis epidemiological data from administrative registries. Incidence data were often estimated on the basis of laboratory-confirmed tests. Not all studies included mortality estimates (Years of Life Lost) in their assessments due to lack of data or the assumption that brucellosis is not a fatal disease. Only two studies used a model with variable health states and corresponding disability weights. The rest used a simplified singular health state approach. Wide variation was seen in the duration chosen for brucellosis, ranging from 2 weeks to 4.5 years, irrespective of the whether a chronic state was included.

conclusionAvailable brucellosis burden of disease assessments vary widely in their methodology and assumptions. Further research is needed to better characterize the clinical course of brucellosis and to estimate case-fatality rates. Additionally, reporting of methodological choices should be improved to enhance transparency and comparability of estimates. These steps will increase the value of these estimates for policy makers.

Indexed as

BrucellosisLife ExpectancyCost of IllnessGlobal HealthHumansQuality-Adjusted Life Years

Identifiers

PMID36512611
PMCPMC9794075

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.