Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37703795›Full record

ArticleTicks and tick-borne diseases2023

Prevalence of five human pathogens in host-seeking Ixodes scapularis and Ixodes pacificus by region, state, and county in the contiguous United States generated through national tick surveillance.

Erik Foster, Sarah A Maes, Karen M Holcomb, Rebecca J Eisen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ticks and tick-borne diseases, 2023. 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. Why are the ticks winning, and what can we do about it?Ticks and tick-borne diseases · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Lyme borreliosis.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2026
    Review
  6. Surveillance forCanada communicable disease report = Releve des maladies transmissibles au Canada · 2026
    Article
  7. Surveillance forCanada communicable disease report = Releve des maladies transmissibles au Canada · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Frontiers in immunology · 2026
    Article
  10. Perinatal transmission ofFrontiers in medicine · 2026
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Erik FosterDivision of Vector-Borne Diseases, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Fort Collins, CO 80521, USA. Electronic address: owm1@cdc.gov.
Sarah A MaesDivision of Vector-Borne Diseases, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Fort Collins, CO 80521, USA.
Karen M HolcombDivision of Vector-Borne Diseases, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Fort Collins, CO 80521, USA.
Rebecca J EisenDivision of Vector-Borne Diseases, National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Fort Collins, CO 80521, USA.

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The majority of vector-borne disease cases reported in the United States (U.S.) are caused by pathogens spread by the blacklegged tick, Ixodes scapularis. In recent decades, the geographic ranges of the tick and its associated human pathogens have expanded, putting an increasing number of communities at risk for tick-borne infections. In 2018, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) initiated a national tick surveillance program to monitor changes in the distribution and abundance of ticks and the presence and prevalence of human pathogens in them. We assessed the geographical representativeness of prevalence data submitted to CDC as part of the national tick surveillance effort. We describe county, state, and regional variation in the prevalence of five human pathogens (Borrelia burgdorferi sensu stricto (s.s.), Borrelia mayonii, Borrelia miyamotoi, Anaplasma phagocytophilum, and Babesia microti) in host-seeking I. scapularis and I. pacificus nymphs and adults. Although I. scapularis and I. pacificus are widely distributed in the eastern and western U.S., respectively, pathogen prevalence was estimated predominantly in ticks collected in the Northeast, Ohio Valley, and Upper Midwest regions, where human Lyme disease cases are most commonly reported. Within these regions, we found that state and regional estimates of pathogen prevalence generally reached predictable and stable levels, but variation in prevalence estimates at the sub-state level was considerable. Borrelia burgdorferi s.s. was the most prevalent and widespread pathogen detected. Borrelia miyamotoi and A. phagocytophilum shared a similarly broad geographic range, but were consistently detected at much lower prevalence compared with B. burgdorferi s.s. Babesia microti was detected at similar prevalence to A. phagocytophilum, where both pathogens co-occurred, but was reported over a much more limited geographic range compared with A. phagocytophilum or B. burgdorferi s.s. Borrelia mayonii was identified at very low prevalence with a focal distribution within the Upper Midwest. National assessments of risk for tick-borne diseases need to be improved through collection and testing of ticks in currently under-represented regions, including the West, South, Southeast, and eastern Plains states.

Indexed as

Babesia microtiBorreliaBorrelia burgdorferiBorrelia burgdorferi GroupIxodesAdultAnimalsHumansPrevalenceSpirochaetalesUnited StatesAnaplasmosisBabesiosisHard tick relapsing feverLyme diseaseTick surveillance

Identifiers

PMID37703795
PMCPMC10629455

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.