ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Proposed research classification criteria for Lyme disease in infection associated chronic illness studies.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characterization ofMicroorganisms · 2026Article
- Borrelia surface proteins: new horizons in Lyme disease diagnosis.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2025Review
- A pilot study of disulfiram for individuals with persistent symptoms despite prior antibiotic treatment for Lyme disease.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Complex chronic adverse events following immunization: a systemic critique and reform proposal for vaccine pharmacovigilance.Therapeutic advances in drug safety · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Research on patients with persistent symptoms despite prior treatment for Lyme disease can be challenging to interpret given the diversity of criteria selected to characterize Lyme disease and to define the syndrome of those with persistent symptoms. Because most research studies only include patients with well-documented prior Lyme disease, the generalizability of the study results is limited, excluding the larger group of patients often seen in community practice who do not meet these stringent enrollment criteria. Researchers at the Lyme and other Tick-borne Diseases Clinical Trials Network (LTD-CTN) recognized early on that a research classification system was needed to facilitate the design of studies that are more inclusive. This paper presents a proposed research classification system. Methods: Criteria used in published clinical research on previously treated Lyme disease were reviewed. Clinical expertise was provided by principal investigators in the LTD-CTN. Further input was obtained from a diverse panel of stakeholders in the field, including clinicians, academic researchers, and patient advocates. This classification system was developed based on feedback collected from all these sources. Results: The new research classification system proposes criteria for Lyme disease at different levels of diagnostic certainty: well-defined, probable, possible, and uncertain. Criteria for ascertainment for each classification level and additional factors to be considered in patient selection for research are described. Conclusion: The proposed research classification system should improve the quality and generalizability of clinical research by providing clear case definitions for enrollment of a more diverse group of patients with sequelae from Lyme disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.