ArticleBMC primary care2023
Prevalence and factors associated with a prescription of a Lyme borreliosis serology for erythema migrans diagnosis in general practice: a study from the French sentinel network, 2009-2020.
Article in BMC primary care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Results from an enhanced surveillance study of laboratory-confirmed acute Lyme disease cases in England between 1 April 2023 and 31 March 2024.Epidemiology and infection · 2026Article
- Resident primary care practitioners' awareness and handling of zoonotic diseases: an explorative online survey in the Hameln-Pyrmont district, Lower Saxony, Germany.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- Computerised decision support system towards informing Lyme borreliosis incidence in France.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
- Prevalence of Lyme Disease and Relapsing FeverPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSerological testing of patients consulting for typical erythema migrans (EM) is not recommended in European recommendations for diagnosis of Lyme borreliosis (LB). Little is known on the level of adherence of French general practitioners to these recommendations. The objectives were to estimate the proportion of Lyme borreliosis serological test prescription in patients with erythema migrans seen in general practice consultations in France, and to study the factors associated with this prescription.
methodsLB cases with an EM reported by the French general practitioners (GPs) of the Sentinelles network between January 2009 and December 2020 were included. To assess the associations with a prescription of a serological test, multilevel logistic regression models were used.
resultsAmong the 1,831 EM cases included, a prescription for a LB serological test was requested in 24.0% of cases. This proportion decreased significantly over the study period, from 46.8% in 2009 to 15.8% in 2020. A LB serological prescription was associated with patients with no reported tick bite (Odds Ratio (OR): 1.95; 95% confidence interval [1.23-3.09]), multiple EM (OR: 3.82 [1.63-8.92]), EM of five centimeters or more (OR: 4.34 [2.33-8.08]), and GPs having diagnosed less than one EM case per year during the study period (OR: 5.28 [1.73-16.11]).
conclusionsSerological testing of patients consulting for EM is not recommended in European recommendations for diagnosis of Lyme borreliosis. Therefore, the significant decrease in the rate of LB serological test for EM over the study period is encouraging. The factors identified in this study can be used to improve messaging to GPs and patients. Further efforts are needed to continue to disseminate diagnostic recommendations for LB to GPs, especially those who rarely see patients with EM.
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.