Post-COVID syndrome in non-hospitalised patients with COVID-19: a longitudinal prospective cohort study

  1. Max Augustin
  2. Philipp Schommers
  3. Melanie Stecher
  4. Felix Dewald
  5. Lutz Gieselmann
  6. Henning Gruell
  7. Carola Horn
  8. Kanika Vanshylla
  9. Veronica Di Cristanziano
  10. Luise Osebold
  11. Maria Roventa
  12. Toqeer Riaz
  13. Nikolai Tschernoster
  14. Janine Altmueller
  15. Leonard Rose
  16. Susanne Salomon
  17. Vanessa Priesner
  18. Jan Christoffer Luers
  19. Christian Albus
  20. Stephan Rosenkranz
  21. Birgit Gathof
  22. Gerd Fätkenheuer
  23. Michael Hallek
  24. Florian Klein
  25. Isabelle Suárez
  26. Clara Lehmann

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Discuss this preprint

Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1016/j.lanepe.2021.100122
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.03.11.21253207: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementIRB: The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the UHC, Germany (16-054 and 20-1187).
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variableThe proportion of 46.5% men (445/958) and 53.5% women (513/958) was balanced (Table 1).

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    We used SPSS Statistics (IBM, Armonk, NY) and GraphPad Prism (GraphPad Software, La Jolla, CA) to compile analyses and graph the data.
    SPSS
    suggested: (SPSS, RRID:SCR_002865)
    GraphPad Prism
    suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)
    GraphPad
    suggested: (GraphPad Prism, RRID:SCR_002798)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Our study has limitations, as common laboratory parameters such as c-reactive protein (CRP), D-Dimers, creatinine, etc. were not routinely assessed. A high drop-out rate within 7 months suggests that true rate of PCS may be lower than 34.8%, as asymptomatic patients may not show up for later follow-up visits. Besides, smoking was not specifically queried, a factor that is known to be associated with poorer outcomes of acute COVID-19 39. Symptoms like fatigue or shortness of breath have initially neither been assessed by validated scoring methods nor objectivated by examinations, since at that time, the rapid acquisition of reconvalescent plasma donors was top priority. However, both of these symptoms were critically discussed between the patient and physician at each clinic visit using the respective completed systematic questionnaire. The symptoms anosmia and ageusia were solely investigated by questionnaires and not by validated olfactory or gustatory test. Whether these patients really had a “loss” or rather a reduction (hyposmia/hypogeusia) or change (e.g. parosmia) of these senses, thus remains unclear. With persistent symptoms even four months after initial onset of symptoms, the focus of the outpatient clinic was shifted and, if necessary, further examinations such as lung spirometry, spiroergometry, olfactometry and laboratory diagnostic examinations were carried out, which are not included in this report. Failure to assess sociodemographic, clinical and laboratory fa...

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a protocol registration statement.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2021.03.11.21253207 on medRxiv