The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Global Burden of Human Brucellosis: A Systematic Review of Disease Frequency
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: This report presents a systematic review of scientific literature published between 1990-2010 relating to the frequency of human brucellosis, commissioned by WHO. The objectives were to identify high quality disease incidence data to complement existing knowledge of the global disease burden and, ultimately, to contribute towards the calculation of a Disability-Adjusted Life Years (DALY) estimate for brucellosis. METHODS/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Thirty three databases were searched, identifying 2,385 articles relating to human brucellosis. Based on strict screening criteria, 60 studies were selected for quality assessment, of which only 29 were of sufficient quality for data analysis. Data were only available from 15 countries in the regions of Northern Africa and Middle East, Western Europe, Central and South America, Sub-Saharan Africa, and Central Asia. Half of the studies presented incidence data, six of which were longitudinal prospective studies, and half presented seroprevalence data which were converted to incidence rates. Brucellosis incidence varied widely between, and within, countries. Although study biases cannot be ruled out, demographic, occupational, and socioeconomic factors likely play a role. Aggregated data at national or regional levels do not capture these complexities of disease dynamics and, consequently, at-risk populations or areas may be overlooked. In many brucellosis-endemic countries, health systems are weak and passively-acquired official data underestimate the true disease burden. CONCLUSIONS: High quality research is essential for an accurate assessment of disease burden, particularly in Eastern Europe, the Asia-Pacific, Central and South America and Africa where data are lacking. Providing formal epidemiological and statistical training to researchers is essential for improving study quality. An integrated approach to disease surveillance involving both human health and veterinary services would allow a better understanding of disease dynamics at the animal-human interface, as well as a more cost-effective utilisation of resources.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Kirk, M. D., Pires, S. M., Black, R. E., Caipo, M., Crump, J. A., Devleesschauwer, B., Döpfer, D., Fazil, A., Fischer-Walker, C. L., Hald, T., et al. (2015) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001921 · Cited by 1,625
“[15]”
Clinical Manifestations of Human Brucellosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Dean, A. S., Crump, L., Greter, H., Hattendorf, J., Schelling, E., & Zinsstag, J. (2012) · PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases · doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0001929 · Cited by 537
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Dean, A. S., Crump, L., Greter, H., Schelling, E., & Zinsstag, J.
- Venue
- PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2012-10-25
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- e1865
- ISSN
- 1935-2727 (ISSN-L)
- 1935-2735
- OpenAlex
- W1970338615
- Cited by
- 534
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Global Burden of Human Brucellosis: A Systematic Review of Disease Frequency. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pntd.0001865
- The paper
- Dean, A. S., Crump, L., Greter, H., Schelling, E., & Zinsstag, J. (2012). Global Burden of Human Brucellosis: A Systematic Review of Disease Frequency. PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0001865
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.