MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406936121 · doi:10.3389/fcvm.2025.1450470

Cardiovascular outcomes in long COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4406936121 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ting Zhang, Zhimao Li, Qimin Mei, Joseph Harold Walline, Zhaocai Zhang, Yecheng Liu, Huadong Zhu, Bin Du

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLong-Term Effects of COVID-19
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisInternal medicineCochrane LibrarySystematic reviewAcute coronary syndromeStroke (engine)MyocarditisCohort studyMEDLINEMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: There is growing evidence that patients with SARS-CoV-2 (The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) may have a variety of cardiovascular complications in the post-acute phase of COVID-19, but these manifestations have not yet been comprehensively characterized. Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of primary research papers which evaluated individuals at least four weeks after confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis and reported on cardiovascular disease prevalence. Systematic search conducted without language restrictions from December 1, 2019 to June 31, 2022 on PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane library, ProQuest Coronavirus Research Database, COVID-19 Living Overview of the Evidence (L-OVE) subset of Episteminokos and the World Health Organization (WHO) Covid-19 databases. Study was reported according to MOOSE-lists and the PRISMA guidelines. The risk of bias was identified using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for observational studies. Random-effects meta-analyses examined the pooled risk difference in the prevalence of each symptom or symptom combination in cases with confirmed SARS-coV-2 infection compared with controls. Results: Eight cohort studies were eligible, including nearly 10 million people. Long COVID-19 was associated with a higher risk of thromboembolic disorders [HR 3.12 (1.60, 6.08)], coronary heart disease [HR 1.61 (1.13, 2.31)], stroke [HR 1.71 (1.07,2.72)], arrhythmia [HR 1.60 (1.13, 2.26)], cardiomyopathy [HR 1.71 (1.12, 2.61)], myocarditis [HR 6.11 (4.17,8.94)], hypertension [HR 1.70 (1.56, 1.85)], heart failure [HR 1.72 (1.15,2.59)] and cardiogenic shock [HR 2.09 (1.53,2.86)] compared to non-COVID-19 controls. Pooled risk differences in long COVID cases compared to controls were significantly higher for cardiomyopathy [0.15% (0.06, 0.23)], deep vein thrombosis [0.45% (0.06, 0.83)] and hypertension (0.32%, (0.06, 0.58) but not for thromboembolic disorders, coronary disease, stroke, arrhythmia, cardiomyopathy, myocarditis, hypertension, heart failure or cardiogenic shock. Conclusion: The risk of cardiovascular disease increased significantly four weeks or more after recovering from acute COVID-19. Care for survivors after an acute attack of COVID-19 should include paying close attention to cardiovascular health and disease. Systematic Review Registration: PROSPERO [CRD42022353965].

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.391
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0770.036
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.312 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Cardiovascular MedicineSame topicLong-Term Effects of COVID-19French-language works237,207