ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2024
Seroepidemiology of Human Tularemia-Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Seroprevalence Studies.
Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tularemia: Historical Perspectives and Current Challenges of a Re-Emerging Zoonosis.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- [Indeterminate pulmonary lesions and lymphadenopathy: A trail leading to nature].Innere Medizin (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Non-vaccinal prophylaxis of tularemia.Frontiers in microbiology · 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
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Seroepidemiologic studies of human tularemia have been conducted throughout the northern hemisphere. The purposes of this study were (1) to provide an overview of Methods: We conducted a systematic review of Results: The weighted pooled seroprevalence among 44 486 participants recruited in 52 studies was 3.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.7-5.1). Reported seroprevalences ranged between 0.2% and 31.3%. Occupational activities associated with an increased likelihood of exposure (risk ratio, 3.51 [95% CI, 3.2-3.86]) and studies from North America versus Europe and Asia (4.53 [4.15-4.94]) were associated with significantly increased seropositive rates. Twenty-eight data sets (47%) reported clinical information on a total of 965 seropositive participants. The weighted pooled estimate for subclinical seropositivity was 84.4% (95% CI, 72.9%-991.7%). Studies from Conclusions: Throughout the northern hemisphere, only a small proportion of study participants showed serologic evidence of exposure to
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.