SynthesisScientific reports2025
A systematic review and meta-analysis of seropositive detection rate of Brucella abortus in blood donor populations.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 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.
- Ultrasensitive Detection and Its Potential Applications in the Diagnosis of Brucellosis.Current microbiology · 2026Review
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
Brucellosis can be transmitted by blood transfusion. This study aimed to further explore the necessity of initiating brucellosis serological testing among blood donors in highly endemic areas by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis of the detection rate of human brucellosis seropositivity to reduce the risk of transfusion-transmitted brucellosis and inform blood safety practices in endemic areas. We searched English databases (Medline, Embase, Web of Science and Cochran Library) and Chinese databases (China Knowledge Network, Wanfang Data Knowledge Service Platform, Wipro Chinese Biomedical Journal Database and China Biomedical Literature Service) for all articles on brucellosis serology in the blood donor population from January 1990 to July 2024, and analysed the results. The combined detection rate and its 95% confidence interval (CI) were estimated using R 4.0.3. Sensitivity analyses were performed to address heterogeneity. Egger's test was used to evaluate publication bias. The meta-analysis included 76,860 subjects from 15 eligible studies. The pooled estimate of the seropositive detection rate for Brucella abortus disease among the included subjects was 0.91% (95% CI: 0.65-1.16%). A certain level of seropositive detection is sufficient to suggest that recipients can be transfused with blood products from donors already infected with brucellosis, with a high likelihood of transfusion-transmitted brucellosis infection. There is a potential risk of blood-borne transmission of brucellosis. In order to lower the risk of brucellosis transmission through blood transfusion, it is necessary to screen the population of blood donors in highly endemic areas using health counseling and serological testing for Brucella.
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.