Consequences of Contracting COVID-19 or Taking the COVID-19 Vaccine for Individuals with a History of Lyme Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individuals with Lyme disease can be very symptomatic. This survey compares the burden of illness for individuals with a history of Lyme disease (HLD) with individuals with a HLD who have either contracted COVID-19 or who have taken the COVID-19 vaccine. The findings describe the relative symptom burden among these three groups using a cross-sectional descriptive survey investigating the burden of Lyme disease in a pandemic. The survey includes the General Symptom Questionnaire-30 (GSQ-30), a brief self-report scale designed to assess the symptom burden in Lyme disease (LD). The results of this survey show that the overall burden of illness among individuals with HLD is not significantly different after contracting COVID-19 or after COVID-19 vaccination. A new survey will be needed to better understand why one in five individuals with a HLD reported long COVID after contracting COVID-19. These results should help clinicians and their patients to discuss the consequences of contracting a COVID-19 infection or being vaccinated against COVID-19.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".