SynthesisScientific reports2024
A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative clinical studies on antibiotic treatment of brucellosis.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Therapeutic Ultrasound Versus Levofloxacin in Lipopolysaccharide-Induced Orchitis: Comparative Effects on Testicular Inflammation and Tissue Recovery in Rats.Iranian journal of pathology · 2026Article
- Brucellosis-related pancytopenia: a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge case report from an endemic region.Iranian journal of microbiology · 2026Article
- ASP-COMPLEX: redefining antimicrobial stewardship to improve outcomes in high-risk patients with severe infections.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2026Review
- Concurrent neurobrucellosis and central nervous system aspergillosis in an immunocompetent host: a case report.Journal of medical case reports · 2026Article
- Hepatic brucelloma with initially negative antibodies: Diagnostic challenges in an endemic region.IDCases · 2026Article
- HflX mediates rifampicin resistance inFrontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- Triple infection with pulmonary tuberculosis, chronic hepatitis C and systemic brucellosis in an HIV/AIDS patient: a case report from northwestern China.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Pathogenicity and virulence ofVirulence · 2025Review
- Knowledge, attitude, and practice regarding brucellosis among confirmed cases.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Progress in brucellosis immune regulation inflammatory mechanisms and diagnostic advances.European journal of medical research · 2025Review
- Effectiveness and Safety of Dual Versus Triple Antibiotic Therapy for Treating Brucellosis Infection: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Machine learning-based prediction model for chronic brucellosis: a multi-feature approach using clinical and laboratory data.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Article
- Clinical Features That Increase Suspicion of Brucella canis Infection in Dogs With Discospondylitis: A Multicenter Case-Control Study.Journal of veterinary internal medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Brucellosis is a difficult to treat infection that requires antibiotic combinations administered over several weeks for clearance of infection and relapse prevention. This systematic review summarizes current evidence for antibiotic treatment of human brucellosis. PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, CINAHL, Web of Science, and China Academic Journal databases were searched for prospective studies that had compared different antibiotic regimens for treating human brucellosis in the last 25 years. Thirty-four studies recruiting 4182 participants were eligible. Standard dual therapy with doxycycline + rifampicin had a higher risk of treatment failure compared to triple therapy which added streptomycin (RR: 1.98, 95% CI 1.17-3.35, p = 0.01) or levofloxacin (RR: 2.98, 95% CI 1.67-5.32, p = 0.0002), but a similar or lower risk compared to alternative dual antibiotic combinations (p > 0.05). The same combination had a higher risk of relapses compared to triple therapy which added streptomycin (RR: 22.12, 95% CI 3.48-140.52, p = 0.001), or levofloxacin (RR: 4.61, 95% CI 2.20-9.66, p < 0.0001), but a similar or lower risk compared to other dual antibiotic combinations (p > 0.05). Triple antibiotic therapy is more effective than standard dual therapy with rifampicin and doxycycline. However, the latter is also efficacious and suitable for uncomplicated disease.
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.