Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39696174›Full record

SynthesisBMC public health2024

Human and animal brucellosis and risk factors for human infection in Ethiopia: a systematic review and meta-analysis (2015-2024).

Gashaw Getaneh Dagnaw, Yordanos Mamuye, Haileyesus Dejene

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
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

3 authors.

Gashaw Getaneh DagnawDepartment of Biomedical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of Gondar, P.O. Box 196, Gondar, Ethiopia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8773-2698
Yordanos MamuyeDepartment of Veterinary Epidemiology and Public Health, College of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of Gondar, P.O. Box 196, Gondar, Ethiopia.
Haileyesus DejeneDepartment of Veterinary Epidemiology and Public Health, College of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science, University of Gondar, P.O. Box 196, Gondar, Ethiopia. haileyesus.dejene@uog.edu.et.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2196-9334

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectiveBrucellosis is a neglected zoonotic disease caused by Brucella species. Unlike most developed nations, the problem of brucellosis in Ethiopia remains a public and animal health concern. This study was conducted to determine the magnitude of brucellosis in animals (mainly cattle, sheep, goats, dogs and camels) and humans, and to identify the risk factors for human brucellosis. METHODOLOGY: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed to conduct this systematic review and meta-analysis, which was performed from May 2024 to July 2024. Academic databases such as PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, PubMed Central, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched to identify articles focusing on brucellosis in humans and animals in Ethiopia. Data extraction was performed according to predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The included articles were appraised using the appraisal tool for cross-sectional studies to assess study quality. Publication bias and small study effects were examined using funnel plot observation and Egger's test, respectively. Statistical analysis was conducted using R software version 4.4.1.

resultsThirty-nine articles published between 2015 and 2024 were included in the final analysis from a total of 1,427 identified articles. The overall pooled seroprevalence of brucellosis was 5.0% (95% CI: 3.0, 6.0). The seroprevalence of brucellosis was higher in humans at 6.9% (95% CI: 4.9, 8.8) and lower in cattle at 3.5% (95% CI: 2.2, 4.7). There was high heterogeneity in the reports of brucellosis seroprevalence between studies (τ² = 0.0038, H² = 255.9, I² = 99.61%, Q-test = 1954.99, df = 56, p ≤ 0.001). Laboratory tests and study location were identified as factors contributing to potential sources of variation in the pooled seroprevalence. Drinking raw milk from aborted animals, touching aborted materials or fetuses, and occupation were among the risk factors for human brucellosis. No publication bias or small study effects were detected.

conclusionThe findings indicate that brucellosis continues to pose a significant zoonotic threat, particularly to humans, where the seroprevalence is notably higher than in animals. These results highlight the need for targeted public health interventions and greater awareness to reduce the incidence of brucellosis, especially among high-risk populations.

Indexed as

BrucellosisZoonosesAnimalsBrucellaCattleDogsEthiopiaGoatsHumansRisk FactorsSeroepidemiologic StudiesSheepBrucellaCamelCattleDogHumanNeglected zoonotic diseaseSero-prevalenceShoat

Identifiers

PMID39696174
PMCPMC11657598

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.