Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33705384›Full record

SynthesisPLoS neglected tropical diseases2021

Louse-borne relapsing fever-A systematic review and analysis of the literature: Part 1-Epidemiology and diagnostic aspects.

Pascal Kahlig, Daniel H Paris, Andreas Neumayr

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. First molecular sequencing ofOpen veterinary journal · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Prevalence of Lyme Disease and Relapsing FeverPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Molecular detection and identification of relapsing feverEmerging microbes & infections · 2022
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Novel approaches for the serodiagnosis of louse-borne relapsing fever.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022
    Article
  19. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Pascal KahligSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0003-4638-3820
Daniel H ParisSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland.
Andreas NeumayrSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland.
Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Louse-borne relapsing fever (LBRF) is a classical epidemic disease, which in the past was associated with war, famine, poverty, forced migration, and crowding under poor hygienic conditions around the world. The disease's causative pathogen, the spirochete bacterium Borrelia recurrentis, is confined to humans and transmitted by a single vector, the human body louse Pediculus humanus. Since the disease has had its heyday before the days of modern medicine, many of its aspects have never been formally studied and to date, remain incompletely understood. In order to shed light on some of these aspects, we have systematically reviewed the accessible literature on LBRF, since the recognition of its mode of transmission in 1907, and summarized the existing data on epidemiology and diagnostic aspects of the disease. Publications were identified by using a predefined search strategy on electronic databases and a subsequent review of the reference lists of the obtained publications. All publications reporting patients with a confirmed diagnosis of LBRF published in English, French, German, and Spanish since 1907 were included. Data extraction followed a predefined protocol and included a grading system to judge the certainty of the diagnosis of reported cases. Historically, Ethiopia is considered a stronghold of LBRF. The recognition of LBRF among East African migrants (originating from Somalia, Eritrea, and Ethiopia) arriving to Europe in the course of the recent migration flow from this region suggests that this epidemiological focus ostensibly persists. Currently, there is neither evidence to support or refute active transmission foci of LBRF elsewhere on the African continent, in Latin America, or in Asia. Microscopy remains the most commonly used method to diagnose LBRF. Data are lacking on sensitivity and specificity of most diagnostic methods.

Indexed as

AnimalsBorreliaEritreaEthiopiaHumansPediculusRefugeesRelapsing FeverSomaliaTransients and Migrants

Identifiers

PMID33705384
PMCPMC7951878
OpenAlexW3134422416

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.