SynthesisCurrent microbiology2025
Comprehensive Meta-Analysis of Brucellosis in Wild and Domestic Birds: Unraveling the Complex Interplay of Transmission and Ecology (1970-2024).
Synthesis in Current microbiology, 2025. 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.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Brucellosis is a zoonotic infection caused by Brucella species, primarily affecting livestock, but with a wider host range that includes marine animals, amphibians, and possibly birds. This article aimed to conduct a meta-analysis of studies on avian brucellosis from 1970 to 2024, to define the role of wild and avian birds in the transmission and ecology of Brucella species. The analysis of 16,135 wild and domestic bird samples did not detect Brucella species (prevalence: 0%; 95% CI: 0.00% to 16.00%), although the wide confidence interval (CI) and moderate heterogeneity suggest uncertainty in the true prevalence. Furthermore, domestic birds exhibited a significantly higher prevalence of 1.31% (CI: 0.51%-2.35%), with very high heterogeneity. Moreover, females exhibited a prevalence of 0.1% (CI: 0.00%-0.52%), with no significant heterogeneity, indicating consistency among studies. Males presented a slightly lower prevalence (0.07%, CI: 0.00%-0.26%) and similarly displayed no heterogeneity. The results indicated that, even though birds are seropositive for brucellosis, their contribution to the natural transmission of the disease is minimal, particularly among domestic species. We note a variation in prevalence depending on the type of bird and the geographic region, with higher prevalence among domestic birds. Significant heterogeneity in infection rates was observed, reflecting complex epidemiological features. Results showed that birds may act as vectors for Brucella species, but further studies are needed to establish their role in transmitting the disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40739071What 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.