{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.043905635648754916, 'fraction_numerical': 0.022280471821756225, 'mean_word_length': 5.0355731225296445, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 2, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Laboratory diagnosis of brucellosis in a rural endemic area in northeastern Spain.

Sera obtained from 62 patients from four mountain counties in Catalonia (Northeastern Spain), in whom brucellosis had been diagnosed on the basis of clinical evidence and/or personal history, were analyzed using the rose Bengal test, standard serum agglutination test (SAT), Coombs' test, ELISA, and complement fixation. The diagnosis was further confirmed through blood cultures. Clinical evidence, epidemiology, and the results from serologic tests were used to assign patients to one of two groups: group 1 (n = 38) patients had primary infections, whereas group 2 (n = 24) patients had been previously exposed to the microorganism, i.e. re-infection of group 2 individuals occurred after long periods of time during which no active infection by Brucella had been detected. Receiving-operating charts (ROC) were used to determine the diagnostic value of the different tests and to establish discriminant values. Blood culture was a valuable diagnostic tool in group 1 (0.92 sensitivity) but was inappropriate in group 2 (0.08). The combination of positive rose Bengal test and agglutination >/=1/160 was valid for diagnosis in group 1. In group 2, agglutination <1/160 (including negative agglutination) did not rule out brucellosis. The combination of positive rose Bengal test and Coombs' test >/=1/320 was the best diagnostic criterion (0.8 specificity; 1 sensitivity). ELISA (for IgG, IgM, or both) did not improve diagnostic accuracy.