ArticleBMC public health2025
Lyme borreliosis risk perceptions, disease knowledge, and training among at-risk groups.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLyme borreliosis (LB) is the most common tick-borne disease in Europe. Although there are indicators that disease risk is higher in the west of Ireland than other areas of Ireland, regional incidence data to confirm this, and to drive effective risk communication is sparse. Professions (e.g. farming, forestry) or recreational activities (e.g. hiking, trail running) that require spending time in tick habitats increase the risk of exposure. The present study is designed to provide baseline information on the perceptions, knowledge, and training of at-risk groups in Ireland relating to LB.
methodsThe study used an online questionnaire to gather data on perceived risk, disease-related knowledge, and the receipt of training by at-risk individuals (n = 443) in Ireland. Data were analysed using IBM SPSS Statistics version 29.0.1.0.
resultsThe study found a median perceived risk of 3/5 (i.e. moderate). There was no difference geographically in perceived risk, despite regional differences in environmental risk factors and cumulative neuroborreliosis rates. The majority (77%) of respondents identified woodlands/scrub as habitats carrying highest LB risk. Fewer than half (48%) of respondents mentioned or described the pathognomonic erythema migrans rash when asked to describe symptoms of LB, and 37% listed erythema migrans plus at least one flu-like symptom. As respondents' perception of risk increased, so did their ability to identify woodland/scrub as risk habitats, and early LB symptoms. However, when asked to rate the amount of training they had received on a 5-point scale (1 indicates no training and 5 indicates maximum training) respondents in at-risk professions indicated a minimal amount of training (median = 2/5) on tick bite and LB prevention, and people engaging in leisure activities gave a response which indicated no training (median = 1/5). Greater levels of training were associated with greater proportions of respondents indicating woodland/scrub habitats as high-risk habitats (p = 0.003, T = 8.876), and describing erythema migrans as a LB symptom (p = 0.08, T = 7.007).
conclusionsThese findings identify the need for more robust risk communication in Ireland, more training for at-risk groups, and the use of targeted awareness campaigns to address knowledge gaps. The implications of the study findings for international research are also discussed.
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.