ArticleEcoHealth2023
Exposure to Brucella spp. in Humans and Cows in a High Milk-Producing Area of Bangladesh.
Article in EcoHealth, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Brucellosis is a zoonotic disease, caused by some species within the Brucella genus. The primary and secondary objectives of this cross-sectional study were to determine the seroprevalence of Brucella antibodies in humans and cows and identify risk factors for exposure to Brucella spp. among people in Shahjadpur sub-district, Bangladesh. Twenty-five villages were randomly selected from the 303 milk-producing villages in the sub-district. We randomly selected 5% of the total households from each village. At each household, we collected demographic information and history of potential exposure to Brucella spp. in humans. In addition, we collected serum from household participants and serum and milk from cattle and tested to detect antibodies to Brucella sp. Univariate analysis was performed to detect associations between seropositivity and demographics, risk factors, and behaviors in households. We enrolled 647 households, 1313 humans, and 698 cows. Brucella antibodies were detected in sera from 27 household participants (2.1%, 95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 1.2-2.9%). Eleven (1.6%, 95%CI 0.6-2.4%) cows had detectable Brucella antibodies in either milk or serum. About half (53%) of the 698 cows exhibited more than one reproductive problem within the past year; of these, seven (2%) had Brucella antibodies. Households with seropositive individuals more frequently reported owning cattle (78% vs. 32%, P < 0.001). Despite a low prevalence of Brucella seropositivity in the study, the public health importance of brucellosis cannot be ruled out. Further studies would help define Brucella prevalence and risk factors in this region and nationally.
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.