Definition and research guide
This page combines a MeSH definition, publication statistics and selected research abstracts. It is a starting point for reading the literature, not a medical textbook or a systematic evidence review.
Content available: 4 complete abstracts (1,212 words), 10 references. Full article text is not stored or reproduced here; follow the PMID, DOI or PMC links to read the original sources and their access terms.
Definition
An acute infectious disease caused by coxiella burnetii. It is characterized by a sudden onset of fever; headache; malaise; and weakness. In humans, it is commonly contracted by inhalation of infected dusts derived from infected domestic animals (animals, domestic).
Definition: NLM Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) scope note (Public domain (U.S. National Library of Medicine); attribution requested). View the MeSH record.
Also known as: Fever, Q; Fevers, Q; Q Fevers; Query Fever; Fever, Query; Fevers, Query; Query Fevers; Coxiella burnetii Fever.
Where it fits in the MeSH classification
- Broader topics
- Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections
Related concepts
- Coxiella Burnetii
- Fever
- Headache
- Animals
- Domestic
Research landscape
PubMed indexes 5,549 records tagged with the MeSH heading “Q Fever” (counts retrieved 2026-10-29). 709 of them (12.8%) were published from 2020 onward, and the busiest period so far is through 1999 with 2,696 records.
Reviews account for 471 records (8.5%) and meta-analyses for 18. Randomized controlled trials number 15 (0.3%) as a share of all records on the topic. Randomized trials make up only a small share of this literature, so much of what is known comes from laboratory, observational or descriptive work.
Show the data
| Period | Records |
|---|---|
| through 1999 | 2,696 |
| 2000-2009 | 771 |
| 2010-2019 | 1,373 |
| 2020 onward | 709 |
Publication-type chart data
| Type | Records | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Reviews | 471 | 8.5% |
| Meta-analyses | 18 | 0.3% |
| Randomized controlled trials | 15 | 0.3% |
Method: PubMed query "Q Fever"[MeSH Terms] with publication-type and date filters, retrieved 2026-10-29.
Reading the evidence in infectious diseases
Infectious disease evidence combines microbiology, epidemiology and clinical trials. Laboratory studies identify pathogens and how they cause harm; surveillance and outbreak investigations describe who is affected and how infection spreads; trials establish whether treatments and vaccines work. Results depend on place and time, because pathogens evolve and resistance patterns and population immunity change. Check when and where the data were collected, how cases were defined and how up to date the evidence is.
Evidence from open-access studies
These open-access studies come from PubMed’s best-match results for this heading (papers whose main topic it is), ranked here by citation count, with one recent addition. Each abstract is reproduced in full under its recorded open licence so that you can read the authors’ own words. They illustrate the literature; they are not a systematic summary of it. Citation counts measure attention, not reliability or clinical benefit.
Sero-prevalence of brucellosis, Q-fever and Rift Valley fever in humans and livestock in Somali Region, Ethiopia [1]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- Information on zoonotic diseases in humans and livestock are limited in pastoral/agro-pastoral communities in Ethiopia.
- Closing excerpt
- Collaboration between public and animal health sectors for further investigation on these zoonoses using the One Health concept is indispensable.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (336 words)
Information on zoonotic diseases in humans and livestock are limited in pastoral/agro-pastoral communities in Ethiopia. A multi-stage cross sectional cluster design study was implemented with the aim to establish the seroprevalence of zoonotic diseases including brucellosis, Q-fever and Rift Valley fever (RVF) in humans and livestock in Adadle Woreda of the Somali Region, Ethiopia. Blood samples were collected from humans and livestock and tested by relevant serological tests. For brucellosis, Rose Bengal test (RBT) and indirect ELISA was used for screening and confirmatory diagnosis respectively. Indirect and competitive ELISA were also used for Q-fever and RVF respectively. The individual seropositivity of Q-fever in livestock was 9.6% (95% CI 5.9-15.1) in cattle, 55.7% (95% CI 46.0-65.0) in camels, 48.8% (95% CI 42.5-55.0) in goats, and 28.9% (95% CI 25.0-33.2) in sheep. In humans, seropositivity of Q-fever was 27.0% (95% CI 20.4-34.0), with prevalence in males of 28.9% vs 24.2% in females (OR = 1.3; 95% CI 0.6-2.5). Camel seropositivity of Q-fever was significantly associated with age (OR = 8.1; 95% CI 2.8-23.7). The individual apparent seroprevalence of RVF was 13.2% (95% CI 8.7-18.8) in humans, 17.9% (95% CI 11.0-27.8) in cattle, 42.6% (95% CI 34.8-50.7) in camels, 6.3% (95% CI 3.3-11.6) in goats and 7.4% (95% CI 4.7-11.5) in sheep. Camels had the highest seropositivity of both Q-fever and RVF. Only a weak correlation was observed between human and livestock seropositivity for both Q-fever and RVF. Only cattle and camels were seropositive for brucellosis by iELISA. The individual seroprevalence of brucellosis was 2.8(0.9-6.4) in humans, 1.5% (95% CI 0.2-5.2) in cattle and 0.6% (95% CI 0.0-3.2) in camels. This study showed the importance of zoonoses in Somali Region and is the first published study to describe RVF exposure in humans and livestock in the country. Even though human exposure to RVF virus was reported, public health sector of Somali Region has not given attention to such zoonoses. Collaboration between public and animal health sectors for further investigation on these zoonoses using the One Health concept is indispensable.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 33493173 · DOI · PMC7861547
The sero-epidemiology of Coxiella burnetii (Q fever) across livestock species and herding contexts in Laikipia County, Kenya [2]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- Coxiella burnetii, the causative agent of Query fever (Q fever), is among the most highly infectious zoonotic pathogens transmitted among livestock, with chronic effects challenging to veterinary and medical detection and care systems.
- Closing excerpt
- Further longitudinal studies are needed to disentangle the mechanisms underlying these patterns, and further explore transmission patterns between wildlife, domestic animal, and human populations.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (293 words)
Coxiella burnetii, the causative agent of Query fever (Q fever), is among the most highly infectious zoonotic pathogens transmitted among livestock, with chronic effects challenging to veterinary and medical detection and care systems. Transmission among domestic livestock species can vary regionally due to herd management practices that determine which livestock species are raised, whether or not livestock are in contact with wildlife, and the susceptibility of these livestock to infection. To explore how different livestock management practices are associated with the risk of infection in multispecies environments, we carried out a comparative study of three types of herd management systems in the central Kenyan county of Laikipia: agro-commercial, mixed conservancy/commercial, and smallholder ranches. We tested C. burnetii antibody seroprevalence in four common livestock species. Across all management types, the highest seroprevalence was in camels (20%), followed by goats (18%), sheep (13%), and cattle (6%). We observed a lower odds of testing seropositive for young compared to adult animals (adjusted OR = 0.44 [95% CI 0.24, 0.76]), and for males compared to females (adjusted OR = 0.52 [95% CI 0.33, 0.80]). Animals from mixed conservancy/commercial and smallholder operations had a higher odds of testing seropositive compared to animals from agro-commercial ranches (adjusted OR = 5.17 [95% CI 2.71, 10.44] and adjusted OR = 2.21 [95% CI 1.17, 4.43] respectively). These data suggest that herd management practices might affect the transmission dynamics of C. burnetiiin arid African ecosystems like those seen in Kenya where several transmission modes are possible, risk of drought has promoted new livestock species such as camels, and multiple wildlife species may co-occur with livestock on the landscape. Further longitudinal studies are needed to disentangle the mechanisms underlying these patterns, and further explore transmission patterns between wildlife, domestic animal, and human populations.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 30788910 · DOI · PMC6563451
The epidemic of Q fever in 2018 to 2019 in Zhuhai city of China determined by metagenomic next-generation sequencing [3]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- Q fever is a worldwide zoonosis caused by Coxiella burnetii (Cb).
- Closing excerpt
- Our study demonstrates Q fever was epidemic in 2018-2019 in Zhuhai city, and this is the first confirmed epidemic of Q fever in a contemporary city in China.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (228 words)
Q fever is a worldwide zoonosis caused by Coxiella burnetii (Cb). From January 2018 to November 2019, plasma samples from 2,382 patients with acute fever of unknown cause at a hospital in Zhuhai city of China were tested using metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS). Of those tested, 138 patients (5.8%) were diagnosed with Q fever based on the presence of Cb genomic DNA detected by mNGS. Among these, 78 cases (56.5%) presented from Nov 2018 to Mar 2019, suggesting an outbreak of Q fever. 55 cases with detailed clinical information that occurred during the outbreak period were used for further analysis. The vast majority of plasma samples from those Cb-mNGS-positive patients were positive in a Cb-specific quantitative polymerase chain reaction (n = 38) and/or indirect immunofluorescence assay (n = 26). Mobile phone tracing data was used to define the area of infection during the outbreak. This suggested the probable infection source was Cb-infected goats and cattle at the only official authorized slaughterhouse in Zhuhai city. Phylogenic analysis based on genomic sequences indicated Cb strains identified in the patients, goat and cattle were formed a single branch, most closely related to the genomic group of Cb dominated by strains isolated from goats. Our study demonstrates Q fever was epidemic in 2018-2019 in Zhuhai city, and this is the first confirmed epidemic of Q fever in a contemporary city in China.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 34264939 · DOI · PMC8282036
Seroprevalence and risk factors for Brucella species and Coxiella burnetii exposure in a cross-sectional serosurvey of occupationally exposed groups in peri-urban Lomé, Togo [4]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- BackgroundBrucella species and Coxiella burnetii have been detected in livestock populations in Togo.
- Closing excerpt
- A One Health prioritization of zoonotic disease would help to bring together the relevant sectors to adequately resource prevention and control of zoonoses of public health concern in Togo, which may particularly impact workers in close contact with animals.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (355 words)
BackgroundBrucella species and Coxiella burnetii have been detected in livestock populations in Togo. Populations exposed to livestock ruminants through their occupation may be at increased risk of infection.Methods/principal findingsA cross-sectional serosurvey was conducted in 108 abattoir and 81 dairy farm workers (from 52 dairy farms) in peri-urban Lomé, Togo in 2019-2020. Structured questionnaires were used to collect data on participant livestock contact and dairy product consumption. Sera were tested using the Rose Bengal plate agglutination test (RBT) and the indirect Brucella IgG Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) for Brucella, and the IgG ELISA for Coxiella burnetii in Phase 1 and in Phase 2. Fresh bulk milk samples from farms were tested using an indirect milk ELISA for Brucella IgG. The association between seropositivity and exposure variables was examined using logistic regression with robust standard errors to account for site-level clustering. Eighteen workers (9.5%, 95% CI 5.5-16.0) were Brucella seropositive. Twenty-eight percent (95% CI 22.5-34.3) of workers were seropositive for C. burnetii. Twenty of fifty-one farms which gave milk samples tested positive for Brucella antibodies (39.2%, 95% CI 26.6 - 53.4%). Farmworkers had nearly twice the crude odds of being Brucella seropositive compared to abattoir workers (OR 1.93, 95% CI: 0.94-3.93, p = 0.07). After adjusting for age, working on farms with animal ill health, a positive milk test, participating in small ruminant husbandry and assisting with cattle abortion were all associated with increased odds of seropositivity. Farm and abattoir workers who consumed raw milk at least every month were more likely to be seropositive for Brucella species (OR 3.79, 95% CI: 2.34-6.13, p ConclusionsLivestock workers in peri-urban Lomé have been exposed to both Brucella and Coxiella burnetii bacteria. The widespread consumption of raw dairy products and lack of personal protective equipment (PPE) use is of concern as both dairy consumption and participation in animal husbandry activities have been seen to increase odds of seropositivity for both pathogens. A One Health prioritization of zoonotic disease would help to bring together the relevant sectors to adequately resource prevention and control of zoonoses of public health concern in Togo, which may particularly impact workers in close contact with animals.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 41557721 · DOI · PMC12858067
Key reviews and meta-analyses
The most cited review-type papers among PubMed’s best-match results for this heading, listed with bibliographic details only. Follow the links for the full text and access terms.
- Research article Q fever [5]
- Research article From Q Fever to Coxiella burnetii Infection: a Paradigm Change [6]
- Research article Natural history and pathophysiology of Q fever [7]
- Research article Q Fever [8]
- Research article Diagnosis of Q fever [9]
- Research article Diagnosis and management of Q fever--United States, 2013: recommendations from CDC and the Q Fever Working Group [10]
References
- Ibrahim M, Schelling E, Zinsstag J, Hattendorf J, Andargie E, Tschopp R. Sero-prevalence of brucellosis, Q-fever and Rift Valley fever in humans and livestock in Somali Region, Ethiopia. . 2021. PMID 33493173 · DOI · PMC7861547
- Larson PS, Espira L, Grabow C, Wang CA, Muloi D, Browne AS, et al.. The sero-epidemiology of Coxiella burnetii (Q fever) across livestock species and herding contexts in Laikipia County, Kenya. . 2019. PMID 30788910 · DOI · PMC6563451
- Huang M, Ma J, Jiao J, Li C, Chen L, Zhu Z, et al.. The epidemic of Q fever in 2018 to 2019 in Zhuhai city of China determined by metagenomic next-generation sequencing. . 2021. PMID 34264939 · DOI · PMC8282036
- Kerr CL, Patassi A, Pato PS, Guitian J, Diop SA, Musallam I, et al.. Seroprevalence and risk factors for Brucella species and Coxiella burnetii exposure in a cross-sectional serosurvey of occupationally exposed groups in peri-urban Lomé, Togo. . 2026. PMID 41557721 · DOI · PMC12858067
- Maurin M, Raoult D. Q fever. Clin Microbiol Rev. 1999. PMID 10515901 · DOI · PMC88923
- Eldin C, Mélenotte C, Mediannikov O, Ghigo E, Million M, Edouard S, et al.. From Q Fever to Coxiella burnetii Infection: a Paradigm Change. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2017. PMID 27856520 · DOI · PMC5217791
- Raoult D, Marrie T, Mege J. Natural history and pathophysiology of Q fever. Lancet Infect Dis. 2005. PMID 15792739 · DOI
- Angelakis E, Raoult D. Q Fever. Vet Microbiol. 2010. PMID 19875249 · DOI
- Fournier PE, Marrie TJ, Raoult D. Diagnosis of Q fever. J Clin Microbiol. 1998. PMID 9650920 · DOI · PMC104936
- Anderson A, Bijlmer H, Fournier PE, Graves S, Hartzell J, Kersh GJ, et al.. Diagnosis and management of Q fever--United States, 2013: recommendations from CDC and the Q Fever Working Group. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2013. PMID 23535757
About this article
- Sources
- NLM Medical Subject Headings (definition, synonyms); NCBI PubMed (counts, identifiers); Europe PMC (open-access abstracts and citation counts).
- Verification
- Every reference was resolved against PubMed on 2026-10-31; title, year and DOI matched.
- Review state
- automated source verified; no human expert review has been recorded yet.
- Version
- 1, last updated 2026-10-29.
See how EvidenceLib is built. Spotted an error? Email support@evidencehelix.com.
Evidence strength
EvidenceHelix's computed view of the study designs behind this topic: how common meta-analyses, randomized trials and reviews are, how recent the literature is, and a plain-language reading. It describes the design mix of the literature. It is not a quality appraisal of any study, and it is not medical advice.