Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39070229›Full record

ArticleCurrent research in parasitology & vector-borne diseases2024

Update on tick-borne pathogens detection methods within ticks.

Eva Krupa, Alexis Dziedziech, Richard Paul, Sarah Bonnet

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current research in parasitology & vector-borne diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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.

Eva KrupaInstitut Pasteur, Université Paris Cité, CNRS UMR 2000, INRAE USC 1510, Ecology and Emergence of Arthropod-borne Pathogens Unit, F-75015, Paris, France.
Alexis DziedziechInstitut Pasteur, Université Paris Cité, CNRS UMR 2000, INRAE USC 1510, Ecology and Emergence of Arthropod-borne Pathogens Unit, F-75015, Paris, France.
Richard PaulInstitut Pasteur, Université Paris Cité, CNRS UMR 2000, INRAE USC 1510, Ecology and Emergence of Arthropod-borne Pathogens Unit, F-75015, Paris, France.
Sarah BonnetInstitut Pasteur, Université Paris Cité, CNRS UMR 2000, INRAE USC 1510, Ecology and Emergence of Arthropod-borne Pathogens Unit, F-75015, Paris, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ticks are known vectors of various pathogens, including bacteria, parasites and viruses, that impact both animal and human health. Improving knowledge of the distribution of tick-borne pathogens, combined with their early detection in ticks, are essential steps to fight against tick-borne diseases and mitigate their impacts. Here we give an overview of what are the common methods of pathogen detection in tick samples, including recent developments concerning how to handle tick samples, get access to tick-borne pathogens by chemical or physical disruption of the ticks, and methods used for the RNA/DNA extraction steps. Furthermore, we discuss promising tools that are developed for other sample types such as serum or blood to detect tick-borne pathogens, and those that could be used in the future for tick samples.

Indexed as

Detection methodsTick-borne pathogensTicks

Identifiers

PMID39070229
PMCPMC11282927

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.