ArticleBMC infectious diseases2025
Development and validation of a clinico-biological score for Brucella spondylitis: a two-center study.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Analysis of Risk Factors for Postoperative Complications of Thoracolumbar Brucella Spondylitis.Infection and drug resistance · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBrucellosis is a zoonotic disease distributed across numerous countries and regions worldwide, presenting with diverse clinical manifestations. The most common complication is spondylitis, which is diagnosed primarily through imaging studies. However, in resource-limited areas, the imaging examinations necessary for diagnosing brucellosis-related spondylitis are often inaccessible. The objective of this study is to establish a simple and readily predictive score within brucellosis patients to screen for spinal involvement.
methodsWe retrospectively collected patient data with brucellosis admitted to the Kashi Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University from January 2019 to December 2023, and randomly assigned them into a training cohort and an internal validation cohort. Data of brucellosis patients admitted to The third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University from January 2014 to December 2023 were collected for an external validation cohort. A diagnostic model was constructed by using a nomogram. Calibration plots, receiver operating characteristic curve, and decision curve analyses were employed to evaluate the model's calibration, accuracy, and clinical utility.
resultsThis study included data from total of 784 patients, of which 210 were diagnosed with Brucella spondylitis. The data was divided into a training cohort (460 patients), an internal validation cohort (198 patients), and an external validation cohort (126 patients). The diagnostic model was formulated using six diagnostic factors: course of disease, age, back pain, joint pain, white blood cell count, and levels of C-reactive proteins. In our study, the AUC values of 0.93 (training), 0.87 (internal validation), and 0.77 (external validation) indicate that the model maintained excellent discriminative ability in the training and internal validation cohorts, and acceptable performance in the external cohort. Decision curve analyses graphically display the significant clinical utility and net benefit of a nomogram. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: The diagnostic model for Brucella spondylitis developed in this study has the potential to assist clinicians in resource-limited settings in achieving a rapid and effective diagnosis of the disease. Our model facilitates the identification of brucellosis-related spondylitis patients requiring extended treatment courses, thereby reducing misdiagnosis and missed diagnosis in resource-constrained areas where imaging examinations are difficult to access, and improving the efficiency of healthcare resource utilization.
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.