Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37892661›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023

What a Tick Can Tell a Doctor: Using the Human-Biting Tick in the Clinical Management of Tick-Borne Disease.

Stephen M Rich, Eric L Siegel, Guang Xu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Detection of the emerging tick-borne pathogen, Tamdy virus, in Dermacentor marginatus ticks, southeastern Türkiye.Revista brasileira de parasitologia veterinaria = Brazilian journal of veterinary parasitology : Orgao Oficial do Colegio Brasileiro de Parasitologia Veterinaria · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Insects · 2023
    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.

Stephen M RichLaboratory of Medical Zoology, Department of Microbiology, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01002, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7175-6380
Eric L SiegelLaboratory of Medical Zoology, Department of Microbiology, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01002, USA.
Guang XuLaboratory of Medical Zoology, Department of Microbiology, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01002, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5240-9276

Funding

NCEZID CDC HHS U01 CK000661
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With expanding concern about ticks, there is a general sense of uncertainty about the diagnosis and treatment of tick-borne diseases. The diagnosis process is often based on clinical judgment in conjunction with laboratory testing and can be pathogen specific. Treatments may require disease-dependent approaches, and co-infections complicate or increase the severity of the clinical picture. Measuring exposure indices in the tick has become popular among providers and their patients, though this practice is not universally understood, and certain public health agencies have voiced concerns regarding interpretation and rigor of testing. As many providers subscribe to or recommend these services to aid in pretest risk and exposure assessments, this work sought to clarify the role of pathogen testing human-biting ticks as a complement to the diagnostic pipeline and raises points that must be addressed through future research and interdisciplinary conversation. Future work is needed to develop quality control oversight for tick testing laboratories. Studies on the integration of tick testing with human cases to see how these services affect health outcomes are also needed. Alongside these, improvements in the quality and availability of diagnostics are of critical importance.

Indexed as

human-biting tickpathogen testingtick-borne disease

Identifiers

PMID37892661
PMCPMC10607280

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.