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).