Global Prevalence of Post-Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Condition or Long COVID: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review
This article has been Reviewed by the following groups
Listed in
- Evaluated articles (ScreenIT)
Abstract
Background
This study aims to examine the worldwide prevalence of post-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) condition, through a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Methods
PubMed, Embase, and iSearch were searched on July 5, 2021 with verification extending to March 13, 2022. Using a random-effects framework with DerSimonian-Laird estimator, we meta-analyzed post-COVID-19 condition prevalence at 28+ days from infection.
Results
Fifty studies were included, and 41 were meta-analyzed. Global estimated pooled prevalence of post-COVID-19 condition was 0.43 (95% confidence interval [CI], .39–.46). Hospitalized and nonhospitalized patients had estimates of 0.54 (95% CI, .44–.63) and 0.34 (95% CI, .25–.46), respectively. Regional prevalence estimates were Asia (0.51; 95% CI, .37–.65), Europe (0.44; 95% CI, .32–.56), and United States of America (0.31; 95% CI, .21–.43). Global prevalence for 30, 60, 90, and 120 days after infection were estimated to be 0.37 (95% CI, .26–.49), 0.25 (95% CI, .15–.38), 0.32 (95% CI, .14–.57), and 0.49 (95% CI, .40–.59), respectively. Fatigue was the most common symptom reported with a prevalence of 0.23 (95% CI, .17–.30), followed by memory problems (0.14; 95% CI, .10–.19).
Conclusions
This study finds post-COVID-19 condition prevalence is substantial; the health effects of COVID-19 seem to be prolonged and can exert stress on the healthcare system.
Article activity feed
-
-
SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.15.21266377: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding Screeners 1 and 2 performed both phases of the screening independently (i.e., were blinded). Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources 22 The literature databases, PubMed and Embase for published articles, as well as iSearch for preprint articles from bioRxiv, medRxiv, SSRN, Research Square, and preprints.org, were searched on July 5, 2021, and search verification was extended through August 12, 2021. PubMedsuggested: (PubMed, RRID:SCR_004846)Embasesuggested: (EMBASE, RRID:SCR_001650)bioRxivsuggested: (bioRxiv, RRID:SCR_003933)We defined PASC as having any … SciScore for 10.1101/2021.11.15.21266377: (What is this?)
Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.
Table 1: Rigor
Ethics not detected. Sex as a biological variable not detected. Randomization not detected. Blinding Screeners 1 and 2 performed both phases of the screening independently (i.e., were blinded). Power Analysis not detected. Table 2: Resources
Software and Algorithms Sentences Resources 22 The literature databases, PubMed and Embase for published articles, as well as iSearch for preprint articles from bioRxiv, medRxiv, SSRN, Research Square, and preprints.org, were searched on July 5, 2021, and search verification was extended through August 12, 2021. PubMedsuggested: (PubMed, RRID:SCR_004846)Embasesuggested: (EMBASE, RRID:SCR_001650)bioRxivsuggested: (bioRxiv, RRID:SCR_003933)We defined PASC as having any symptoms, or at least one new or persisting symptom during the follow-up time. PASCsuggested: (PASC , RRID:SCR_016642)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:This leads to the several limitations of this systematic review and meta- analysis.
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.
Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.
-