Prevalence of long-term effects in individuals diagnosed with COVID-19: an updated living systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective Post COVID-19 condition refers to persisting or recurring symptoms weeks after acute COVID-19 illness which can significantly impact quality of life and health systems. It is important to understand the manifestation and magnitude of this condition. The objective of this living systematic review is to summarize the prevalence of symptoms and sequelae reported by people ≥4 weeks after COVID-19 diagnosis. Design Systematic review, meta-analysis and narrative synthesis. Data sources Embase, Medline, PsychInfo, Cochrane Central and select grey literature up to April 14, 2021. Methods We adapted a previous search strategy used by the U.K. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and updated it to search for new literature. Two reviewers screened references independently; one extracted data and assessed risk of bias and certainty of the evidence while another verified them. Prevalence data from laboratory-confirmed populations were meta-analyzed using a random effects model and synthesized separately in the short-term (4-12 weeks) and long-term (>12 weeks) periods after diagnosis. Data from clinically-diagnosed populations were synthesized narratively. Results Of the 4444 unique citations, 84 observational studies met our inclusion criteria. Over 100 post COVID-19 symptoms and sequelae were reported. Sixty-one percent (95% CI: 44-76%, low certainty ) and 53% (95% CI: 41-65%, low certainty ) of laboratory-confirmed individuals reported persistence or presence of one or more symptoms in the short- and long-term periods, respectively. The most prevalent symptoms in both periods included: fatigue, general pain or discomfort, shortness of breath, cognitive impairment and mental health symptoms. Conclusions A substantial proportion of individuals reported a variety of symptoms ≥4 weeks after COVID-19 diagnosis. Due to gaps in the research base, and the low certainty of the evidence currently available, further research is needed to determine the true burden of post COVID-19 condition in the general population and in specific subgroups. PROSPERO registration number CRD42021231476.
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 | 0.015 | 0.066 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".