Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36719875›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Human brucellosis in Baringo County, Kenya: Evaluating the diagnostic kits used and identifying infecting Brucella species.

Nelly M A Waringa, Lilian W Waiboci, Lilly Bebora, Peter W Kinyanjui, Philemon Kosgei, Stella Kiambi, Eric Osoro

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Exploring bovine brucellosis in Bangladesh: Current scenario and future outlook.Journal of advanced veterinary and animal research · 2024
    Review
  7. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Nelly M A WaringaDepartment of Biochemistry, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya.ORCID 0000-0001-6260-9346
Lilian W WaibociDepartment of Biochemistry, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya.
Lilly BeboraDepartment of Veterinary Pathology, Microbiology and Parasitology, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya.ORCID 0000-0001-8573-5345
Peter W KinyanjuiDepartment of Biochemistry, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya.
Philemon KosgeiDepartment of Veterinary Pathology, Microbiology and Parasitology, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya.
Stella KiambiDepartment of Livestock and Fisheries, Ministry of Agriculture, Nairobi, Kenya.ORCID 0000-0001-6605-988X
Eric OsoroMinistry of Health, Zoonotic Diseases Unit, Nairobi, Kenya.
University of Nairobi · KEMinistry of Agriculture Livestock and Fisheries · KEMinistry of Health · KE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human brucellosis diagnosis has been a challenge in Brucella-endemic areas. In Kenya, diagnosis is usually carried out using Febrile Brucella Antigen agglutination test (FBAT) whose performance is not well documented. This paper reports on the sensitivity and specificity of the FBAT used for brucellosis diagnosis on blood samples/serum collected in three healthcare facilities in Baringo County, Kenya, and on Brucella species present in the study area. The FBAT test results at the hospitals were used to guide patient management. Patients who visited the hospital's laboratory with a clinician's request for brucellosis testing also filled a questionnaire to assess knowledge and attitudes associated with transmission of the disease in the study area. The remaining serum samples were tested again using FBAT and Rose Bengal Plate Test (RBPT) within a month of blood collection at the University Nairobi Laboratory. The two rapid tests were then compared, with respect to brucellosis diagnostic sensitivity and specificity. To identify infecting Brucella species, a proportion 43% (71/166) of the blood clots were analyzed by multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) using specific primers for B. abortus, B. melitensis, B. ovis and B. suis. Out of 166 serum samples tested, 26.5% (44/166) were positive using FBAT and 10.2% (17/166) positive using RBPT. The sensitivity and specificity of FBAT compared to RBPT was 76.47% and 71.19%, respectively while the positive and negative predictive values were 29.55% and 96.72%, respectively. The FBAT showed higher positivity then RBPT. The difference in sensitivity and specificity of FBAT and RBPTs was relatively low. The high FBAT positivity rate would be indication of misdiagnosis; this would lead to incorrect treatment. Brucella abortus was detected from 9.9% (7/71) of the blood clots tested; no other Brucella species were detected. Thus human brucellosis, in Baringo was mainly caused by B. abortus.

Indexed as

BrucellosisAgglutination TestsAnimalsAntibodies, BacterialAntigens, BacterialBrucella abortusHumansKenyaPredictive Value of TestsRose BengalSheepAntibodies, BacterialAntigens, BacterialRose Bengal

Identifiers

PMID36719875
PMCPMC9888686
OpenAlexW4318669286

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.