MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307384737 · doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckac131.528

Methodological choices in brucellosis burden of disease assessments: A systematic review

2022· review· en· W4307384737 on OpenAlexaff
C di Bari, Narmada Venkateswaran, Grace Patterson, David Pigott, Brecht Devleesschauwer

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Public Health · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicBrucella: diagnosis, epidemiology, treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrucellosisPublic healthMedicineSystematic reviewEpidemiologyGrey literaturePopulationEnvironmental healthDisability-adjusted life yearDisease burdenBurden of diseaseCase fatality rateDiseaseMEDLINEVeterinary medicinePolitical sciencePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Foodborne and zoonotic diseases such as brucellosis present many challenges to public health and economic welfare. Increasingly, researchers and public health institutes use disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) to generate a comprehensive comparison of the population health impact of these conditions. DALY calculations entail several methodological choices and assumptions, with data gaps and uncertainties to accommodate. The following review identifies existing brucellosis burden studies and analyses their methodological choices and assumptions. Methods/Findings A systematic search for brucellosis burden calculations was conducted in pre-selected international and grey literature databases. Using a standardized reporting framework, we evaluated each estimate on a variety of key methodological assumptions necessary to compute a DALY. One study reported estimates at the global level, the rest (13) at national or subnational. Most studies retrieved brucellosis epidemiological data from administrative registries. Incidence data were often estimated based on laboratory-confirmed tests. Not all studies included mortality estimates (YLLs) in their assessments due to the lack of data or the assumption that brucellosis is not a fatal disease. Only two studies used a model with variable health states and corresponding disability weights. The rest used a simplified singular health state approach. Wide variation was seen in the duration chosen for brucellosis, ranging from 2 weeks to 4.5 years, irrespective of whether a chronic state was included. Conclusions Available brucellosis burden assessments vary widely in their methodology and assumptions. Further research is needed to characterize better the total clinical course of brucellosis and estimate case-fatality rate. In addition, reporting of methodological choices should be improved to enhance transparency and comparability of estimates. These steps will increase the value of these estimates for policymakers. Key messages • Inconsistencies in reporting methods and assumptions are found, which hinder transparency and understanding of the methodological choices and the reuse of estimates for prioritization purposes. • Thus, there is a need for a more standardized reporting system for DALY estimates, which could resemble a checklist that reports the methodological choices and assumptions.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.087
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.272
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score0.460

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0870.272
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0120.016
Bibliometrics0.0140.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.706
GPT teacher head0.555
Teacher spread0.151 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
DomainMethods
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Public HealthSame topicBrucella: diagnosis, epidemiology, treatmentFrench-language works237,207