MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006802397 · doi:10.1093/trstmh/trz133

The prevalence and risk factors for human Brucella species infection in a cross-sectional survey of a rural population in Punjab, India

2019· article· en· W3006802397 on OpenAlexaff
Punam Mangtani, Isha Berry, Wendy Beauvais, Hannah Holt, Amit Kulashri, Satinder Bharti, Vivek Sagar, Patrick Nguipdop‐Djomo, Jasbir Singh Bedi, Manmeet Kaur, Javier Guitián, John McGiven, Paviter Kaur, Jatinder Paul Singh Gill, Gagandeep Singh Grover, Rajesh Kumar

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicBrucella: diagnosis, epidemiology, treatment
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of Toronto
FundersBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilDepartment of Biotechnology, Government of West BengalAnimal and Plant Health Agency
KeywordsMedicineBrucellosisCross-sectional studyIce calvingOdds ratioVeterinary medicinePopulationZoonosisEnvironmental healthEpidemiologyLivestockBrucellaDemographyBiologyPregnancyLactationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Brucellosis is an important neglected zoonosis. Effective cattle vaccines are available but are infrequently used in India, where rural households commonly own one or two cattle as sources of protein and income. We assessed the prevalence of infection and risk factors in humans. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional sero-survey in randomly selected individuals in 60 villages in Punjab. Infection prevalence was assessed by positive Rose Bengal testing or immunoglobulin G enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Risk factors were adjusted for potential confounding using multivariable analyses. RESULTS: Of the 1927 subjects who were approached, 93% agreed to participate. Age-standardised prevalence for Brucella infection was 2.24% (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.61 to 3.11). More than 60% of households kept cattle and 10% assisted with calving or abortions. Nearly all individuals consumed boiled cow/buffalo milk from their own or neighbours' cattle and 3.3% consumed goat's milk. There was a 2.18 times increased odds (95% CI 0.96 to 4.95) of infection with calving/abortions and a 4.26 times increased odds (95% CI 1.33 to 13.6) with goat's milk but not bovine milk consumption. CONCLUSIONS: An association with calving/abortions and goat's milk consumption was seen. Brucella vaccination of household livestock would reduce the risk to humans in such settings. Additional measures include biosecurity training around calving/abortions, education to boil all milk and for healthcare workers to test for brucellosis.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.284 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations37
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and HygieneSame topicBrucella: diagnosis, epidemiology, treatmentFrench-language works237,207