ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2017
Application of Bayesian decision-making to laboratory testing for Lyme disease and comparison with testing for HIV.
Article in International journal of general medicine, 2017. 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, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Physical Therapist Recognition and Referral of Individuals With Suspected Lyme Disease.Physical therapy · 2021Review
- Quantitative multiplexed strategies for human Lyme disease serological testing.Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.) · 2021Review
- A Clinical Diagnostic System for Late-Stage Neuropsychiatric Lyme Borreliosis Based upon an Analysis of 100 Patients.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Estimates for Lyme borreliosis infections based on models using sentinel canine and human seroprevalence data.Infectious Disease Modelling · 2020Article
- Differentiating Psychosomatic, Somatopsychic, Multisystem Illnesses, and Medical Uncertainty.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Review
- Proposed Lyme Disease Guidelines and Psychiatric Illnesses.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Review
- Precision medicine: retrospective chart review and data analysis of 200 patients on dapsone combination therapy for chronic Lyme disease/post-treatment Lyme disease syndrome: part 1.International journal of general medicine · 2019Article
- Neuropsychiatric Lyme Borreliosis: An Overview with a Focus on a Specialty Psychiatrist's Clinical Practice.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Review
- Suicide and Lyme and associated diseases.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2017Article
- Empirical validation of the Horowitz Multiple Systemic Infectious Disease Syndrome Questionnaire for suspected Lyme disease.International journal of general medicine · 2017Article
- Update to: Application of Bayesian decision-making to laboratory testing for Lyme disease and comparison with testing for HIV.International journal of general medicine · 2017Article
- Improving biomarkers of inflammation including phosphorylated tau in a patient with chronic Lyme disease/post-treatment Lyme disease syndrome using dapsone combination therapy: A case study and literature review.Journal of Alzheimer's disease reportsReview
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, Bayes' theorem was used to determine the probability of a patient having Lyme disease (LD), given a positive test result obtained using commercial test kits in clinically diagnosed patients. In addition, an algorithm was developed to extend the theorem to the two-tier test methodology. Using a disease prevalence of 5%-75% in samples sent for testing by clinicians, evaluated with a C6 peptide enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), the probability of infection given a positive test ranged from 26.4% when the disease was present in 5% of referrals to 95.3% when disease was present in 75%. When applied in the case of a C6 ELISA followed by a Western blot, the algorithm developed for the two-tier test demonstrated an improvement with the probability of disease given a positive test ranging between 67.2% and 96.6%. Using an algorithm to determine false-positive results, the C6 ELISA generated 73.6% false positives with 5% prevalence and 4.7% false positives with 75% prevalence. Corresponding data for a group of test kits used to diagnose HIV generated false-positive rates from 5.4% down to 0.1% indicating that the LD tests produce up to 46 times more false positives. False-negative test results can also influence patient treatment and outcomes. The probability of a false-negative test for LD with a single test for early-stage disease was high at 66.8%, increasing to 74.9% for two-tier testing. With the least sensitive HIV test used in the two-stage test, the false-negative rate was 1.3%, indicating that the LD test generates ~60 times as many false-negative results. For late-stage LD, the two-tier test generated 16.7% false negatives compared with 0.095% false negatives generated by a two-step HIV test, which is over a 170-fold difference. Using clinically representative LD test sensitivities, the two-tier test generated over 500 times more false-negative results than two-stage HIV testing.
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.