ArticleBMC infectious diseases2024
Molecular examination for Coxiella burnetii and Brucella spp. infections in Iranian women experiencing spontaneous miscarriage.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Brucella effector protein BtpB facilitates STAT3 activation to regulate polarization in macrophages during infection.Veterinary research · 2026Article
- Evidence ofNew microbes and new infections · 2025Review
- Raw Equid Milk: A Potential Risk for Q Fever?Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSpontaneous miscarriage, a leading health concern globally, often occurs due to various factors, including infections. Among these, Coxiella burnetii and Brucella spp. may have adverse effects on pregnancy outcomes. While previous research has established a link between infections and spontaneous miscarriage, our study aimed specifically to investigate the presence of these two pathogens in abortion samples from women who experienced spontaneous miscarriages in Iran. Our study can add to the existing knowledge by focusing on Iran, a region with a high prevalence of C. burnetii and Brucella spp. As a result, it could provide a better understanding and unique insights into the relationship of these pathogens with spontaneous miscarriages in endemic regions.
methodsFrom March 2021 to March 2022, a total of 728 abortion samples (including placenta and cotyledon) were collected from 409 women who had experienced spontaneous miscarriages in the provinces of Tehran, Fars, and West Azerbaijan in Iran. The specimens included 467 Formalin-Fixed Paraffin-Embedded (FFPE) and 261 fresh frozen samples. After DNA extraction from abortion samples, the quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) assay targeted a specific fragment of the IS1111 and IS711 elements for molecular identification of C. burnetii and Brucella spp., respectively. Furthermore, the qPCR assay employing specific primers for different species was used to determine the species of Brucella.
resultsAmong the studied women, 1 out of 409 (0.24%) samples tested positive for Brucella spp., specifically Brucella melitensis. There were no positive specimens for C. burnetii.
conclusionsOur study contributes to understanding the potential involvement of Brucella species in spontaneous infectious abortion within endemic regions. The identification of B. melitensis in this study highlights the need for further research in this area. However, while our results suggest a relatively low or zero identification of these pathogens in our sample population, this does not rule out the possibility of undetected infections. Therefore, it is critical to acknowledge the limitations of the molecular techniques used (qPCR), which may have potential limitations such as sensitivity and specificity. Moreover, because 64.15% of our samples were FFPE, the sensitivity of the qPCR test may be reduced. These raise concerns about the accuracy of the reported prevalence rates and the potential for false positives or negatives.
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.