ReviewScience progress2018
Recent strategies for the diagnosis of early Lyme disease.
Review in Science progress, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of the Serodiagnostic Accuracy Tests for Lyme Disease in Adults and Children: A Network Meta-Analysis.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Retrospective Analysis of Potential Lyme Disease Clinical Cases in Argentina.Microorganisms · 2024Article
- Lyme borreliosis diagnosis: state of the art of improvements and innovations.BMC microbiology · 2023Review
- Recent Advances in the Immunologic Method Applied to Tick-Borne Diseases in Brazil.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Cross-Reactive Results in Serological Tests for Borreliosis in Patients with Active Viral Infections.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Immunoreactivity of Polish Lyme Disease Patient Sera to SpecificDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- A fluorescent plasmonic biochip assay for multiplex screening of diagnostic serum antibody targets in human Lyme disease.PloS one · 2020Article
- Evaluation of Patient IgM and IgG Reactivity Against Multiple Antigens for Improvement of Serodiagnostic Testing for Early Lyme Disease.Frontiers in public health · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lyme disease (LD) is the most common tick-borne disease in the Northern Hemisphere. As the most prevalent vector-borne disease in the USA, LD affects 300,000 human cases each year. LD is caused by inoculation of the bacterial spirochete, Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato, from an infected tick. If not treated quickly and completely, the bacteria disseminate from the tick's biting site into multiple organs including the joints, heart, and brain. Thus, the best outcome from medical intervention can be expected with early detection and treatment with antibiotics, prior to multi-organ dissemination. In the absence of a characteristic rash, LD is diagnosed using serological testing involving enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) followed by western blotting, which is collectively known as the two-tier algorithm. These assays detect host antibodies against the bacteria, but are hampered by low sensitivity, which can miss early LD cases. This review discusses the application of some current assays for diagnosing LD clinically, thus providing a foundation for exploring newer techniques being developed in the laboratory for more sensitive detection of early LD.
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.