ArticleInternational journal of general medicine2018
Relapsing fever
Article in International journal of general medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dermatological and Genital Manifestations of Lyme Disease Including Morgellons Disease.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2021Article
- Lyme Disease: Diversity ofHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Line Immunoblot Assay for Tick-Borne Relapsing Fever and Findings in Patient Sera from Australia, Ukraine and the USA.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Detection of tick-borne infection in Morgellons disease patients by serological and molecular techniques.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background
methodsSerological testing for reactivity to Bb and RFB antigens was performed in 543 patients with suspected tick-borne illness using a Western blot technique. Further evaluation of a subset of 321 patients residing in California was obtained. Serum samples were tested for IgM and IgG antibodies reactive with Bb and RFB, and samples were classified by county of residence according to Bb reactivity alone, RFB reactivity alone, and dual reactivity against Bb and RFB. Seroreactivity was ranked in counties with the highest absolute number and the highest prevalence of positive samples.
resultsOf the 543 total serum samples, 32% were positive for Bb, 22% were positive for RFB, and 7% were positive for both Bb and RFB. Of the 321 serum samples from patients residing in California, 33% were positive for Bb, 27% were positive for RFB, and 11% were positive for both Bb and RFB. In the California cohort, the highest rates of positive serological testing for Bb were found in Santa Clara, Alameda, and Contra Costa counties, while the highest rates of positive serological testing for RFB were found in Santa Clara, Alameda, Marin, and San Francisco counties. The highest rates of dual reactivity against Bb and RFB were found in Contra Costa, Alameda, and San Francisco counties. Among the 24 counties with patients who were tested, Bb seropositivity alone was found in four counties, RFB seropositivity alone was found in two counties, and seropositivity for both Bb and RFB was found in 14 counties.
conclusionResults of this pilot study suggest that seroreactivity against Bb and RFB is widespread in California, and dual exposure to Bb and RFB may complicate the diagnosis of tick-borne disease. Greater awareness of RFB and broader screening for this tick-borne infection is warranted.
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.