Prevalence and Epidemiological Patterns of Bovine Brucellosis in Africa: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract Background Bovine brucellosis is an important zoonotic and livestock disease with substantial implications for animal productivity and public health in Africa. However, evidence on its prevalence and epidemiological patterns remains geographically and methodologically heterogeneous. Objective To systematically synthesize evidence on the prevalence, epidemiological patterns, risk factors, and control-related findings of bovine brucellosis in Africa. Methods A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Literature searches were performed in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar. Following screening and eligibility assessment, 48 studies were included in the systematic review. Of these, 45 studies provided sufficient prevalence data for quantitative synthesis. A DerSimonian–Laird random-effects meta-analysis of logit-transformed prevalence estimates was performed, with subgroup analyses by country, geographical region, diagnostic approach, and publication year. Epidemiological risk factors and control-related findings were synthesized narratively because of substantial differences in definitions, study designs, and reported effect measures. Results The 45 studies included in the quantitative synthesis comprised 337,705 animals, of which 12,725 were seropositive. The crude sample-size-weighted prevalence was 3.77%, whereas the pooled random-effects prevalence was 6.13% (95% CI: 4.49–8.32%). Between-study heterogeneity was extremely high (Q = 6713.1, df = 44, p < 0.001; I² = 99.34%; τ² = 1.2017), indicating substantial variation in prevalence estimates across studies. Country-level estimates also varied markedly, with particularly high pooled estimates reported in South Sudan, Sudan, Namibia, Ghana, Somalia, and Egypt. Subgroup analyses demonstrated differences according to geographical region and diagnostic approach, although these comparisons should be interpreted cautiously because of differences in study populations, settings, diagnostic algorithms, and sampling strategies. Reported epidemiological factors included herd size, animal age and sex, breed, abortion history, herd management, production systems, livestock movement, and human–livestock interaction. Conclusion Bovine brucellosis shows substantial geographical and methodological heterogeneity across the available African evidence. The pooled prevalence of 6.13% provides a summary of the included evidence but should not be interpreted as a uniform continent-wide prevalence estimate given the extreme between-study heterogeneity. Strengthening standardized diagnostic procedures, risk-based surveillance, vaccination programs and integrated One Health approaches is warranted. Future studies should use harmonized diagnostic algorithms, standardized risk-factor definitions, and comparable sampling frameworks to improve the reliability and comparability of prevalence estimates. Registration This systematic review and meta-analysis was registered on the Open Science Framework (OSF): https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/EVFDR.