ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2025
Livestock production losses attributable to brucellosis in northern and central Tanzania: Application of an epidemiological-economic modelling framework.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prevalence of Brucellosis in Small Ruminants in Africa from 2000 to 2025: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Veterinary sciences · 2026Review
- Spatiotemporal dynamics, clustering, and ARIMA-based short-term prediction of human brucellosis in Xinjiang, China.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Laboratory Surveillance of Bovine Brucellosis: Predictors of Rose Bengal Test Positivity in Mpumalanga Province, South Africa (2021-2024).Veterinary sciences · 2026Article
- Brucellosis vaccine development: immunological mechanisms, animal models, and future directions.Archives of microbiology · 2026Review
- MiR-1 mediates autophagy via ATG14 in sheep Leydig cells infected withFrontiers in veterinary science · 2026Article
- Editorial: Research advances toward One Health in brucellosis.Frontiers in microbiology · 2026Article
- [Analysis of factors affecting fibrosis reversal in patients with metabolic associated steatohepatitis based on magnetic resonance elastography].Zhonghua gan zang bing za zhi = Zhonghua ganzangbing zazhi = Chinese journal of hepatology · 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.
Funding
Abstract
Livestock brucellosis is an endemic disease in many low-resource settings. Despite its widespread distribution, little is known about the scale of economic impacts caused by the disease. This study aimed to develop an integrated epidemiological-economic modelling framework to estimate production losses attributable to livestock brucellosis, using Tanzania as a case study. Data on livestock production and prevalence of exposure to Brucella spp. were obtained from surveys conducted in northern and central Tanzania between 2013 and 2019. A clustering algorithm was applied to classify households into pastoral and non-pastoral production systems. A Bayesian latent-class analysis model was applied to derive livestock brucellosis prevalence estimates. A herd-growth model was used to estimate production losses attributable to brucellosis. A total of 1,541 households (384 classified as pastoral and 1,157 as non-pastoral) contributed data on livestock production or prevalence of exposure to Brucella spp. The median (95% uncertainty interval, UI) individual-level brucellosis prevalence in cattle, sheep, and goats was 5.1% (3.4-6.9), 1.3% (0.1-3.0), and 2.5% (0.3-4.8) in the pastoral system, and 0.7% (0.1-1.6), 1.6% (0.2-3.8), and 2.5% (0.3-4.9) in the non-pastoral system, respectively. The median (95% UI) annual losses attributable to brucellosis in cattle, sheep, and goats, per infected animal, were 74.4 (26.2-211.7), 9.7 (3.4-23.1) and 10.6 (3.7-25.0) international dollars (int. $) in the pastoral system, and 62.3 (16.8-228.6), 6.3 (1.8-17.1) and 7.0 (2.2-17.9) int. $ in the non-pastoral system, respectively. Household-level losses were equivalent to 4.4% (2.1-8.8) and 0.6% (0.2-1.6) of the median (95% UI) livestock-derived income in the pastoral and non-pastoral systems, respectively. This study did not capture the system-wide impacts of brucellosis, including on human health. The estimated losses are only a part of the full societal economic impact of the disease. These results can be used to inform cost-benefit analyses of potential interventions and guide policy development for brucellosis control.
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.