ReviewThe Milbank quarterly2012
The rise and fall of the lyme disease vaccines: a cautionary tale for risk interventions in American medicine and public health.
Review in The Milbank quarterly, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 51 citations in OpenAlex.
- Lessons Unlearned: The Barriers to Lyme Borreliosis Vaccination and the Risk of Repeating History.Vaccines · 2026Article
- The effect of altruism on COVID-19 vaccination rates.Health economics review · 2023Article
- Understanding consumer and clinician perceptions of a potential Lyme disease vaccine.Health education research · 2022Article
- The year that shaped the outcome of the OspA vaccine for human Lyme disease.NPJ vaccines · 2022Review
- Article
- Clinical Effectiveness of Lyme Vaccine: A Matched Case-Control Study.Open forum infectious diseases · 2021Article
- Pharmaceutical Side Effects and Mental Health Paradoxes among Racial-Ethnic Minorities.Journal of health and social behavior · 2020Article
- Knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors regarding tick-borne disease prevention in endemic areas.Ticks and tick-borne diseases · 2019Article
- Recommendations and barriers to vaccination in systemic lupus erythematosus.Autoimmunity reviews · 2018Review
- Lyme borreliosis.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2016Review
- Live Attenuated Borrelia burgdorferi Targeted Mutants in an Infectious Strain Background Protect Mice from Challenge Infection.Clinical and vaccine immunology : CVI · 2016Article
- Immunization with a Borrelia burgdorferi BB0172-derived peptide protects mice against lyme disease.PloS one · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
contextTwo vaccines to prevent Lyme disease (LD) were developed and tested in the 1990s. Despite evidence of their safety and efficacy in clinical trials and initial postmarketing surveillance, one vaccine was withdrawn before the regulatory review and the other after only three years on the market. An investigation of their history can illuminate (1) the challenges faced by many new risk-reducing products and practices and (2) the important role played by their social and psychological, as distinct from their biomedical or scientific, efficacy in how they are used, and their ultimate market success or failure.
methodsThis article reviewed medical and popular literature on LD vaccines, analyzed the regulatory hearings, and conducted interviews with key participants.
findingsEven if proved safe and effective, LD vaccines faced regulatory and market challenges because the disease was geographically limited, treatable, and preventable by other means. Pharmaceutical companies nevertheless hoped to appeal to consumers' desire for protection and control and to their widespread fear of the disease. The LD advocacy community initially supported the vaccines but soon became critical opponents. The vaccines' success was seen as threatening their central position that LD was chronic, protean, and difficult to treat. The activists' opposition flipped the vaccines' social and psychological efficacy. Instead of the vaccines restoring control and reducing fear, demand was undermined by beliefs that the vaccines caused an LD-like syndrome.
conclusionsThe social and psychological efficacy of many risk-reducing practices and products, such as new "personalized vaccines," is to provide insurance and reduce fear. Yet the actions of self-interested actors can easily undermine this appeal. In addition to evaluating the scientific efficacy and safety of these practices and products, policymakers and others need to understand, anticipate, and perhaps shape the potential social and psychological work they might do.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.