Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36849445›Full record

SynthesisEmerging microbes & infections2023

Follow-up outcomes of asymptomatic brucellosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Fande Li, Lanping Du, Hua Zhen, Mujinyan Li, Shuqi An, Wenqi Fan, Yuke Yan, Meifang Zhao, Xin Han, Zhuo Li and 4 more

Full text readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Emerging microbes & infections, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. The Brief Case: Incidental finding ofJournal of clinical microbiology · 2024
    Review
  11. Journal of clinical medicine · 2024
    Review
  12. Article
  13. 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

14 authors.

Fande LiDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Key Laboratory of Zoonosis, Ministry of Education, School of Public Health, Jilin University, Changchun, People's Republic of China.
Lanping DuDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Key Laboratory of Zoonosis, Ministry of Education, School of Public Health, Jilin University, Changchun, People's Republic of China.
Hua ZhenDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Key Laboratory of Zoonosis, Ministry of Education, School of Public Health, Jilin University, Changchun, People's Republic of China.
Mujinyan LiDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Key Laboratory of Zoonosis, Ministry of Education, School of Public Health, Jilin University, Changchun, People's Republic of China.
Shuqi AnDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Key Laboratory of Zoonosis, Ministry of Education, School of Public Health, Jilin University, Changchun, People's Republic of China.
Wenqi FanDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Key Laboratory of Zoonosis, Ministry of Education, School of Public Health, Jilin University, Changchun, People's Republic of China.
Yuke YanDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Key Laboratory of Zoonosis, Ministry of Education, School of Public Health, Jilin University, Changchun, People's Republic of China.
Meifang ZhaoDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Key Laboratory of Zoonosis, Ministry of Education, School of Public Health, Jilin University, Changchun, People's Republic of China.
Xin HanDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Key Laboratory of Zoonosis, Ministry of Education, School of Public Health, Jilin University, Changchun, People's Republic of China.
Zhuo LiDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Key Laboratory of Zoonosis, Ministry of Education, School of Public Health, Jilin University, Changchun, People's Republic of China.
Huixin YangDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Key Laboratory of Zoonosis, Ministry of Education, School of Public Health, Jilin University, Changchun, People's Republic of China.
Cui ZhangDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Key Laboratory of Zoonosis, Ministry of Education, School of Public Health, Jilin University, Changchun, People's Republic of China.
Chao GuoBeijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Qing ZhenDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Key Laboratory of Zoonosis, Ministry of Education, School of Public Health, Jilin University, Changchun, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0002-2816-4539

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Balancing the potentially serious outcomes of asymptomatic brucellosis and "waiting" for treatment in clinical practice is an urgent issue. Therefore, we assessed the follow-up outcomes and epidemiological characteristics of asymptomatic brucellosis in the absence of treatment to provide evidence-based clinical clues. We searched eight databases in which 3610 studies from 1990 to 2021 were related to the follow-up outcomes of asymptomatic brucellosis. Thirteen studies, involving 107 cases, were finally included. Regarding the follow-up outcomes, we examined the presence or absence of symptoms and decreased serum agglutination test (SAT) titre. During the 0.5-18 months follow-up period, the pooled prevalence of appearing symptomatic was 15.4% (95% CI 2.1%-34.3%), cases that remained asymptomatic were 40.3% (95% CI 16.6%-65.8%), and decreased SAT titre was observed in 36.5% (95% CI 11.6%-66.1%). Subgroup analysis indicated that the pooled prevalence of appearing symptomatic with follow-up times of less than 6 months, 6-12 months, and 12-18 months was 11.5%, 26.4%, and 47.6%, respectively. The student subgroup had a higher prevalence of symptoms (46.6%) than the occupational and family populations. In conclusion, asymptomatic brucellosis has a high likelihood of appearing symptomatic and its severity may be underestimated. Active screening of occupational and family populations should be enhanced, and special attention should be paid to high-titre students for early intervention, if necessary. Additionally, future prospective, long-term, and large-sample follow-up studies are essential.

Indexed as

BrucellosisAgglutination TestsFollow-Up StudiesHumansPrevalenceasymptomaticBrucellosisfollow-up outcomesmeta-analysisprevalencepublic health

Identifiers

PMID36849445
PMCPMC10013368

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
reference markers read28
measurements read72
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.