Methodological choices in brucellosis burden of disease assessments: A systematic review.
Journal
PLoS neglected tropical diseases
ISSN: 1935-2735
Titre abrégé: PLoS Negl Trop Dis
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101291488
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2022
12 2022
Historique:
received:
06
05
2022
accepted:
25
11
2022
revised:
27
12
2022
pubmed:
14
12
2022
medline:
30
12
2022
entrez:
13
12
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
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. DALYs calculations, however, entail a number of methodological choices and assumptions, with data gaps and uncertainties to accommodate. Thisreview identifies existing brucellosis burden of disease studies and analyzes their methodological choices, assumptions, and uncertainties. It supports the Global Burden of Animal Diseases programme in the development of a systematic methodology to describe the impact of animal diseases on society, including human health. A systematic search for brucellosis burden of disease 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. Fourteen studies satisfied the inclusion criteria (human brucellosis and quantification of DALYs). One study reported estimates at the global level, the rest were national or subnational assessments. Data regarding different methodological choices were extracted, including detailed assessments of the adopted disease models. Most studies retrieved brucellosis epidemiological data from administrative registries. Incidence data were often estimated on the basis of laboratory-confirmed tests. Not all studies included mortality estimates (Years of Life Lost) in their assessments due to 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 the whether a chronic state was included. Available brucellosis burden of disease assessments vary widely in their methodology and assumptions. Further research is needed to better characterize the clinical course of brucellosis and to estimate case-fatality rates. Additionally, reporting of methodological choices should be improved to enhance transparency and comparability of estimates. These steps will increase the value of these estimates for policy makers.
Sections du résumé
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. DALYs calculations, however, entail a number of methodological choices and assumptions, with data gaps and uncertainties to accommodate. Thisreview identifies existing brucellosis burden of disease studies and analyzes their methodological choices, assumptions, and uncertainties. It supports the Global Burden of Animal Diseases programme in the development of a systematic methodology to describe the impact of animal diseases on society, including human health.
METHODS/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS
A systematic search for brucellosis burden of disease 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. Fourteen studies satisfied the inclusion criteria (human brucellosis and quantification of DALYs). One study reported estimates at the global level, the rest were national or subnational assessments. Data regarding different methodological choices were extracted, including detailed assessments of the adopted disease models. Most studies retrieved brucellosis epidemiological data from administrative registries. Incidence data were often estimated on the basis of laboratory-confirmed tests. Not all studies included mortality estimates (Years of Life Lost) in their assessments due to 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 the whether a chronic state was included.
CONCLUSION
Available brucellosis burden of disease assessments vary widely in their methodology and assumptions. Further research is needed to better characterize the clinical course of brucellosis and to estimate case-fatality rates. Additionally, reporting of methodological choices should be improved to enhance transparency and comparability of estimates. These steps will increase the value of these estimates for policy makers.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36512611
doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0010468
pii: PNTD-D-22-00583
pmc: PMC9794075
doi:
Types de publication
Systematic Review
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0010468Subventions
Organisme : Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
ID : INV-005366
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Copyright: © 2022 Di Bari et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Zoonoses Public Health. 2019 Aug;66(5):487-494
pubmed: 31090193
Popul Health Metr. 2009 Jun 15;7:9
pubmed: 19527516
Bull World Health Organ. 1994;72(3):429-45
pubmed: 8062401
Clin Infect Dis. 2001 Apr 15;32(8):1172-7
pubmed: 11283806
Infect Drug Resist. 2020 Apr 14;13:1067-1079
pubmed: 32341659
Bull World Health Organ. 2003;81(12):867-76
pubmed: 14997239
Popul Health Metr. 2012 Sep 12;10(1):19
pubmed: 22967055
Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 1992 Mar-Apr;86(2):206-9
pubmed: 1440791
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2012;6(12):e1929
pubmed: 23236528
Vet Microbiol. 2002 Dec 20;90(1-4):111-34
pubmed: 12414138
Zh Mikrobiol Epidemiol Immunobiol. 2016 May;(3):31-37
pubmed: 30695450
Emerg Infect Dis. 2011 Sep;17(9):1581-90
pubmed: 21888782
Int J Food Microbiol. 2013 Aug 16;166(1):34-47
pubmed: 23827806
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2012;6(10):e1865
pubmed: 23145195
BMC Public Health. 2007 Nov 03;7:315
pubmed: 17980046
Intern Med. 2013;52(7):745-50
pubmed: 23545668
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2021 Jan 7;15(1):e0008977
pubmed: 33411798
PLoS Med. 2007 Dec;4(12):e317
pubmed: 18162038
PLoS One. 2015 Dec 03;10(12):e0142498
pubmed: 26633883
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016 Jul 07;10(7):e0004831
pubmed: 27387925
Transbound Emerg Dis. 2020 Feb 19;:
pubmed: 32077219
Croat Med J. 2010 Aug;51(4):327-36
pubmed: 20718086
Lancet. 2021 Mar 20;397(10279):1045-1046
pubmed: 33549170
Int J Infect Dis. 2015 Sep;38:95-100
pubmed: 26159844
Emerg Infect Dis. 2007 Dec;13(12):1895-900
pubmed: 18258041
Int J Public Health. 2014 Jun;59(3):565-9
pubmed: 24752429
Prev Vet Med. 2018 Jun 1;154:148-155
pubmed: 29685439
Eur J Epidemiol. 2003;18(3):267-74
pubmed: 12800954
Prev Vet Med. 2005 Jun 10;69(1-2):77-95
pubmed: 15899298
Eur J Public Health. 2022 Apr 1;32(2):289-296
pubmed: 35015851
Vet Microbiol. 2002 Dec 20;90(1-4):135-45
pubmed: 12414139
East Afr Med J. 1997 May;74(5):317-20
pubmed: 9337012
Lancet. 2012 Dec 15;380(9859):2063-6
pubmed: 23245602
Emerg Infect Dis. 1999 Sep-Oct;5(5):607-25
pubmed: 10511517
J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 Oct;62(10):1006-12
pubmed: 19631508
Lancet. 2020 Oct 17;396(10258):1204-1222
pubmed: 33069326
PLoS Med. 2015 Dec 03;12(12):e1001921
pubmed: 26633831
J Formos Med Assoc. 2020 Sep;119(9):1372-1381
pubmed: 32268967