ReviewBiochemia medica2026
Viral triggers of Guillain-Barré syndrome: implications for laboratory diagnostics.
Review in Biochemia medica, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) is a leading cause of acquired acute neuromuscular paralysis and is an immune-mediated disorder of the peripheral nervous system (PNS). Accumulating evidence indi-cates that GBS is often preceded by infectious events that trigger autoimmune responses through mechanisms such as molecular mimicry and autoantibody production. Campylobacter jejuni remains the most common bacterial agent, but viral pathogens also contribute to the development of GBS. This review summarizes the current evidence regarding viruses as triggers of GBS, including herpes-viruses, hepatotropic viruses (A, B, C, and E), human immunodeficiency virus, Zika virus, influenza virus, varicella-zoster virus, and the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. Emphasis is placed on laboratory test results related to viral GBS, including antiganglioside antibodies, serological markers of recent in-fection, molecular diagnostic methods, and cerebrospinal fluid analysis. From the standpoint of la-boratory medicine, both the clinical diagnosis and the distinction of GBS subtypes can be supported by the identification of recent viral infections and the detection of immunological biomarkers. How-ever, cross-reactivity, extended antibody persistence, and inadequate assay standardization frequently make it difficult to interpret laboratory test results. In patients with probable viral GBS, this review shows the diagnostic significance and limitations of routine laboratory testing. It also highlights the significance of close coordination between laboratory professionals and clinicians.
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.