Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33705387›Full record

SynthesisPLoS neglected tropical diseases2021

Louse-borne relapsing fever-A systematic review and analysis of the literature: Part 2-Mortality, Jarisch-Herxheimer reaction, impact on pregnancy.

Pascal Kahlig, Andreas Neumayr, Daniel H Paris

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 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Frontiers in immunology · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Prevalence of Lyme Disease and Relapsing FeverPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Review
  8. Evidence forPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Novel approaches for the serodiagnosis of louse-borne relapsing fever.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022
    Article
  11. 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
Andreas NeumayrSwiss Tropical and Public Health Institute, Basel, Switzerland.
Daniel H ParisSwiss 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 corporis. Since the disease was at its peak 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 mortality, Jarisch-Herxheimer reaction (JHR), and impact on pregnancy. Publications were identified by using a predefined search strategy of 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. The high mortality rates often found in literature are confined to extreme scenarios. The case fatality rate (CFR) of untreated cases is on average significantly lower than frequently assumed. In recent years, a rise in the overall CFRs is documented, for which reasons remain unknown. Lacking standardized criteria, a clear diagnostic threshold defining antibiotic treatment-induced JHR does not exist. This explains the wide range of occurrence rates found in literature. Pre-antibiotic era data suggest the existence of a JHR-like reaction also in cases treated with arsenicals and even in untreated cases. LBRF-related adverse outcomes are observed in 3 out of 4 pregnancies.

Indexed as

Abortion, SpontaneousAnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsBorreliaChloramphenicolDisease VectorsErythromycinFemaleHumansPediculusPenicillinsPregnancyPregnancy Complications, InfectiousRelapsing FeverTetracyclinesTransients and MigrantsAnti-Bacterial AgentsChloramphenicolErythromycinPenicillinsTetracyclines

Identifiers

PMID33705387
PMCPMC7951929
OpenAlexW3133996938

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.