Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25351855›Full record

ArticleCurrent infectious disease reports2014

A concise critical analysis of serologic testing for the diagnosis of lyme disease.

Roberta L DeBiasi

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Current infectious disease reports, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Tick-borne anaplasmosis and myocarditis in eastern Ontario.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2026
    Article
  2. Establishing a Pregnancy Lyme Disease Biobank.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Roberta L DeBiasiDivision of Pediatric Infectious Diseases, Children's National Health System, 111 Michigan Avenue, NW, West Wing 3.5, Suite 100, Washington, DC, 20010, USA, rdebiasi@cnmc.org.
Children's National · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Diagnostic testing for Lyme disease in the clinical setting primarily relies on assessment of serologic responses to infection, with the exception of the early localized phase of disease, in which the diagnosis must be made clinically, due to the recognized insensitivity of serologic testing at this phase of disease. For the diagnosis of early disseminated and late disease, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends a two-tiered approach to testing consisting of initial IgM and IgG quantitative enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), followed by confirmation of all indeterminate or positive ELISA tests with separate IgG and IgM Western blots. This critical analysis addresses the sensitivity, specificity, and predictive value of serologic testing for Lyme disease in early localized, early disseminated, and late disease. Other testing modalities currently under evaluation are also discussed, including IgG vlsE C6 peptide ELISA, other two-tiered testing strategies, rapid diagnostics, and PCR. An understanding of the strengths and limitations of currently available testing for Lyme disease is critical for appropriate diagnosis.

Identifiers

PMID25351855
OpenAlexW1985052431

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.