MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6908037188 · doi:10.25384/sage.c.6157392.v1

Gastrointestinal manifestations of long COVID: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2022· other· en· W6908037188 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueSage Journals Data · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIrritable bowel syndromeConfidence intervalMeta-analysisAbdominal painMEDLINEGastrointestinal diseaseSystematic review

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background:Prolonged symptoms after COVID-19 are an important concern due to the large numbers affected by the pandemic.Objectives:To ascertain the frequency of gastrointestinal (GI) manifestations as part of long GI COVID.Design:A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting GI manifestations in long COVID was performed.Data Sources and Methods:Electronic databases (Medline, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science) were searched till 21 December 2021 to identify studies reporting frequency of GI symptoms in long COVID. We included studies reporting overall GI manifestations or individual GI symptoms as part of long COVID. We excluded pediatric studies and those not providing relevant information. We calculated the pooled frequency of various symptoms in all patients with COVID-19 and also in those with long COVID using the inverse variance approach. All analysis was done using R version 4.1.1 using packages ‘meta’ and ‘metafor’.Results:A total of 50 studies were included. The frequencies of GI symptoms were 0.12 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.06–0.22, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 99%] and 0.22 (95% CI, 0.10–0.41, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 97%) in patients with COVID-19 and those with long COVID, respectively. The frequencies of abdominal pain, nausea/vomiting, loss of appetite, and loss of taste were 0.14 (95% CI, 0.04–0.38, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 96%), 0.06 (95% CI, 0.03–0.11, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 98%), 0.20 (95% CI, 0.08–0.43, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 98%), and 0.17 (95% CI, 0.10–0.27, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 95%), respectively, after COVID-19. The frequencies of diarrhea, dyspepsia, and irritable bowel syndrome were 0.10 (95% CI, 0.04–0.23, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 98%), 0.20 (95% CI, 0.06–0.50, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 97%), and 0.17 (95% CI, 0.06–0.37, <i>I</i><sup>2</sup> = 96%), respectively.Conclusion:GI symptoms in patients were seen in 12% after COVID-19 and 22% as part of long COVID. Loss of appetite, dyspepsia, irritable bowel syndrome, loss of taste, and abdominal pain were the five most common GI symptoms of long COVID. Significant heterogeneity and small number of studies for some of the analyses are limitations of the systematic review.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.654
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3400.000

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 head0.164
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.221 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSage Journals DataFrench-language works237,207