Methods: A prospective cohort study involving different populations within the Vidarbha regions of Maharashtra, India was conducted through camps organised from May 2009 to October 2015. A total of 568 serum samples were collected from high-risk people recruited as study cohorts based on inclusion criteria, additional risk factors and clinical symptoms. Samples were evaluated by indirect ELISA using the whole-cell antigens of B. abortus. The results were compared with the commercially available IgG detection ELISA kit to ascertain the specificity and sensitivity of the developed test.
Results: Fever, body ache, joint pain, lower back pain, loss of appetite and weight loss were major symptoms associated with the disease. With the cut-off of > 0.8, the positivity of brucellosis infection was at 12.32% (70/568) compared to 9.33% (53/568) as detected by the commercial kit. The in-house developed ELISA method yielded a sensitivity of 87.5% and specificity of 99.18% as compared to the commercial kits (sensitivity -80.30% and specificity -99.6%).
Discussion: The B. abortus S19-derived whole-cell protein-based ELISA is rapid and cost-effective and can be used for screening brucellosis infection in lieu of the commercially available ELISA kits.
METHODS: This paper draws on a 12-country study series on MSC for health and sustainable development, in the context of the health and rights of women, children and adolescents. It is written by core members of the research coordination and country teams. Issues were analyzed during the study period through 'real-time' discussions and structured reporting, as well as through literature reviews and retrospective feedback and analysis at the end of the study.
RESULTS: We identify four considerations that are unique to MSC research which will be of interest to other researchers, in the context of COVID-19 and beyond: 1) use theoretical frameworks to frame research questions as relevant to all sectors and to facilitate theoretical generalizability and evolution; 2) specifically incorporate sectoral analysis into MSC research methods; 3) develop a core set of research questions, using mixed methods and contextual adaptations as needed, with agreement on criteria for research rigor; and 4) identify shared indicators of success and failure across sectors to assess MSCs.
CONCLUSION: In responding to COVID-19 it is evident that effective MSC is an urgent priority. It enables partners from diverse sectors to effectively convene to do more together than alone. Our findings have practical relevance for achieving this objective and contribute to the growing literature on partnerships and collaboration. We must seize the opportunity here to identify remaining knowledge gaps on how diverse sectors can work together efficiently and effectively in different settings to accelerate progress towards achieving shared goals.