Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35204387›Full record

ReviewDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2022

Occupational Lyme Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Nicola Magnavita, Ilaria Capitanelli, Olayinka Ilesanmi, Francesco Chirico

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Incidence of Lyme Borreliosis in Europe: A Systematic Review (2005-2020).Vector borne and zoonotic diseases (Larchmont, N.Y.) · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Silent Spread ofHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Seroprevalence forEuro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2023
    Article
  13. 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

4 authors.

Nicola MagnavitaPost-Graduate School of Occupational Medicine, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-0988-7344
Ilaria CapitanelliPrevention Service in the Workplace (SPRESAL), Local Health Unit Roma 4, 00053 Civitavecchia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9199-1705
Olayinka IlesanmiDepartment of Community Medicine, College of Medicine, University of Ibadan, Ibadan 200281, Nigeria.ORCID 0000-0003-0827-6442
Francesco ChiricoPost-Graduate School of Occupational Medicine, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 00168 Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-8737-4368

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lyme disease (LD) can have significant consequences for the health of workers. The frequency of infection can be estimated by using prevalence and incidence data on antibodies against Borrelia Burgdoferi (BB). A systematic search of studies published in English between 2002 and 2021 and a meta-analysis were conducted in PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases. Out of a total of 1125 studies retrieved, 35 articles were included in the systematic review. Overall, in these studies, outdoor workers showed a 20.5% BB seroprevalence rate. Meta-analysis, performed on 15 studies (3932 subjects), revealed a significantly increased risk in outdoor activities (OR 1.93 95%CI 1.15-3.23), with medium-level heterogeneity (I

Indexed as

diagnosisinfectious diseaseoccupational healthoutdoor workerspublic healthseroprevalencetick-borne diseases

Identifiers

PMID35204387
PMCPMC8870942

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.