ArticleBMC microbiology2026
Sensitivity of current laboratory methods for brucellosis diagnosis at endemic foci.
Article in BMC microbiology, 2026. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBrucella is an intracellular pathogen that can infect both animals and humans. Brucellosis is one of the most important zoonotic diseases and a global public health problem.
methodsIn this study, 800 blood and serum samples were collected during 2021–2022 from suspected brucellosis patients with clinical symptoms, fever and chills, night sweats, recurrent and prolonged fever, weight loss, anorexia, and joint inflammation at medical centers in eastern and northeastern cities of Iran. The laboratory procedures were conducted between 2021 and 2023. The samples were evaluated via the culture method, Wright, 2-mercaptoethanol, Enzyme Linked Immuno Sorbent Assay, Polymerase Chain Reaction for the 16 S rRNA gene target, and real-time Polymerase Chain Reaction for the IS711 gene target diagnostic tests.
resultsSixty-six percent of the patients were men and 34% women with 12–86 years old. The most common age group was 25–45 years. The most common clinical symptom was fever (38%), and 51.5% of the patients had a history of livestock contact. Brucella melitensis was detected in 25 of the 44 cultured samples through culture (56.81% and 82.5% specificity). All the isolated species were Brucella melitensis. A positive Wright test was detected in 33 serum samples (75% sensitivity, 89.63% specificity), a positive 2-mercaptoethanol test was detected with 68.96% sensitivity, 88.45% specificity, and an Enzyme Linked Immuno Sorbent Assay was detected with 78% sensitivity, 91.18% specificity. Polymerase Chain Reaction targeting the 16 S rRNA gene identified 32 positive samples (72.72% sensitivity, 90.9% specificity). Real-time Polymerase Chain Reaction targeting the IS711 gene revealed 34 positive samples and the highest diagnostic value, with 77.2% sensitivity and 93% specificity.
conclusionThe study revealed that compared with bacterial culture and serology techniques, IS711 real-time PCR is the most sensitive test. Also, selection of diagnostic tests is dependent on the acute, subacute or chronic forms of brucellosis.
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.