Skip to main content

Table 2 Input parameters

From: Comparative assessment of passive surveillance in disease-free and endemic situation: Example of Brucella melitensis surveillance in Switzerland and in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Probabilities of detection Name Value Source
Proportion of female animals in small ruminant flock in CH and BH PrFem RiskPert (0.90; 0.96: 0.98) [19]
Proportion of pregnant animals in flock in CH and BH PrPreg RiskPert (0.70; 0.90; 0.95) [19]
Probability that an infected pregnant female will abort Abort RiskPert (0.187; 0.56; 0.70) [2022]
Probability that farmer calls veterinarian in CH (= low DA) FCallsVCH RiskPert (0.10; 0.20; 0.30) Personal experience DC Hadorn
Probability that veterinarian takes sample in CH (= medium DA) SamplCH RiskPert (0.40; 0.50; 0.60) Personal experience DC Hadorn
Probability that farmer calls veterinarian in BH (= medium DA) FCallsVBH RiskPert (0.40; 0.50; 0.60) [19]
Probability that veterinarian takes sample in BH (= medium to high DA) SamplBH RiskPert (0.55; 0.65; 0.75) [19]
Diagnostic test sensitivity in CH and BH TSens 0.95  
Diagnostic test specificity in CH and BH TSpec 1.00 [4]
  1. Input parameters for the stochastic simulation model to quantify the detection performance of abortion testing (ABT) for the surveillance of Brucella melitensis (Bm) in small ruminants in Switzerland (CH) and Bosnia and Herzegovina (BH).