ArticleJugan geon-gang gwa jilbyeong2025
[Surveillance of Tick Populations in the Republic of Korea in 2024].
Article in Jugan geon-gang gwa jilbyeong, 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
Objectives: Hard ticks are major vectors carrying various pathogens in the Republic of Korea (ROK), including the severe fever with thrombocytopenia syndrome (SFTS) virus. Recent findings suggest ticks have the potential to carry multiple infectious agents. We assessed hard tick distribution to improve tick-borne disease risk assessment by providing up-to-date information regarding tick density and pathogen presence. Methods: From April to November 2024, ticks were collected monthly from 16 sites spanning four high-risk environments (mountain roads, graves, copses, and grasslands). Twelve traps (three per environment) baited with dry ice were placed at each site. Tick density was measured using the average number of ticks collected per trap for comparison with previous years. Results: In total, 71,924 hard ticks representing three genera and six species were collected. Conclusions: The 2024 hard tick index was 46.8, representing a 30.0% increase over 2023 (36.0) and a 13.9% increase over the 2020 to 2022 average (41.1). The increase in the hard tick index is presumed to be due to the rise in average temperature and a sharp increase in tick density in certain regions. As the risk of vector-borne diseases increases due to climate change in ROK, it is essential to adhere to prevention guidelines to avoid infectious diseases.
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.