ArticlePathogens (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Predicting Lyme Disease: A One Health Approach.
Article in Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Lyme disease is the most common vector-borne disease in North America. Predicting Lyme disease incidence is a key component of public health preparedness. Previously, we demonstrated that the volume of data searches on Google Trends for terms related to Lyme disease, such as "Lyme" and "tick bite", can be used as a tool to predict monthly human Lyme disease incidence at the state level. The objective of this project was to build upon our previous work by adding environmental and canine data to our predictive models for the prediction of state-level human and canine Lyme disease incidence. Human data were acquired from state health departments. Canine data were acquired from IDEXX Laboratories. We hypothesized that incorporating a One Health approach with human, animal, and environmental data would improve the predictive ability of the models. The One Health model performed significantly better (Mean Absolute Error [MAE] = 12.1) in predicting human disease incidence in 6 out of 16 states compared to the environmental data model (MAE = 16.5), human search terms model (MAE = 21.4), canine data (search terms + case count) model (MAE = 31.1), and the canine case data model (MAE = 32.0). For canine Lyme disease incidence, the One Health model performed worse (MAE = 330.5) compared to the canine search data model (MAE = 282.3), the human data (search terms + cases) model (MAE = 248.4), and the environmental data (MAE = 221.5) model. However, even the best-performing models had large prediction errors, which limit practical utility. Future studies should incorporate alternative data streams, such as electronic health records and insurance claims, to test predictive ability.
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.