Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34200175›Full record

ArticlePathogens (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Pitfalls in Tick and Tick-Borne Pathogens Research, Some Recommendations and a Call for Data Sharing.

Agustín Estrada-Peña, Aitor Cevidanes, Hein Sprong, Javier Millán

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

22 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Investigation of Tick-Borne Pathogens inAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

4 authors.

Agustín Estrada-PeñaDepartment of Animal Health. Faculty of Veterinary Medicine. University of Zaragoza, 50013 Zaragoza, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-7483-046X
Aitor CevidanesDepartment of Animal Health, NEIKER-Basque Institute for Agricultural Research and Development, Basque Research and Technology Alliance (BRTA), Parque Científico y Tecnológico de Bizkaia P812, 48160 Derio, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-1874-6399
Hein SprongCenter for Infectious Disease Control, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Mailbox 63, Room V353, Antonie van Leeuwenhoeklaan 9, P.O. Box 1, 3720 BA Bilthoven, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0218-4320
Javier MillánResearch Group in Emerging Zoonoses, Instituto Agroalimentario de Aragón-IA2 (Universidad de Zaragoza-CITA), 50013 Zaragoza, Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-5608-781X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An understanding of the relationships of ticks and tick-borne pathogens can only be achieved by integrating data from multiple studies. The publication of raw material is a necessary step for wide-area meta-analyses and study design, data collection and reporting require harmonization. This is an opinion paper, not a consensus position, and is open to debate. This work reflects our view about how data should be communicated in mainstream journals. We indicate rules that should be observed in recording weather data, to avoid serendipitous correlations between the density of ticks and climate variables and recommend the inclusion of raw data in reports. We stress the need for standardized methods to collect ticks that cannot be obtained by standard flagging. The reporting of infection rates of pathogens in ticks should avoid conclusions based on pure molecular findings in feeding ticks. Studies demonstrating the vectorial capacity of ticks should not be supported only by molecular surveys of feeding ticks. Vacuous conclusions about vectorial or reservoir status based solely on the finding of genomic material of a pathogen should be discouraged. We stress that phylogenetic studies based on random selection of sequences from GenBank are unsuitable. We firmly support the development of a dedicated server of curated sequences of ticks and pathogens as a standard for future studies.

Indexed as

GenBankguidelinesprevalence reportingtickstick-surveystick-transmitted pathogens

Identifiers

PMID34200175
PMCPMC8229135

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.