ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2024
Emerging Tick-borne Infections in the Upper Midwest and Northeast United States Among Patients With Suspected Anaplasmosis.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Powassan Virus in the United States: An AI-Integrative One Health Scoping Review of Ecological Drivers, Zoonotic Interactions, Symptom Profiles, and Public Health Implications.Infectious disease reports · 2026Review
- Analytical comparison of 11 CE-IVD marked real-time PCR assays for Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato detection.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Emerging tick-transmitted illnesses are increasingly recognized in the United States (US). To identify multiple potential tick-borne pathogens in patients from the Upper Midwest and Northeast US with suspected anaplasmosis, we used state-of-the-art methods (polymerase chain reaction [PCR] and paired serology) to test samples from patients in whom anaplasmosis had been excluded. Methods: Five hundred sixty-eight patients without anaplasmosis had optimal samples available for confirmation of alternative tick-borne pathogens, including PCR and/or paired serology (acute-convalescent interval ≤42 days). Results: Among 266 paired serology evaluations, for which the median acute-convalescent sampling interval was 28 (interquartile range, 21-33) days, we identified 35 acute/recent infections (24 [9%] Conclusions: By identifying other tick-borne agents in patients in whom anaplasmosis had been excluded, we demonstrate that emerging tick-borne infections will be identified if specifically sought.
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.