The Evolution of Long COVID Research, 2020 to 2025: A Bibliometric Analysis with Implications for Clinical Practice and Policy
Listed in
This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.Abstract
Background
Since 2020, recognition of long COVID (post-acute sequelae of COVID-19) has prompted rapid multidisciplinary research across medicine, public health, psychology, and the social sciences. The literature is extensive and heterogeneous, making it challenging to synthesise current knowledge, identify evidence gaps, and inform research priorities.
Methods
We performed a bibliometric review of long COVID publications indexed in Scopus from January 2020 to March 2025. Records were analysed using VOSviewer and Biblioshiny to assess publication trends, country and institutional contributions, authorship networks, citation impact, and thematic clusters.
Results
Publications on long COVID grew at an annual rate of 19.81%, peaking in 2024, reflecting intensified global attention. The United States, China, and the United Kingdom were the largest contributors. Thematic mapping revealed three dominant clusters: clinical research on manifestations and diagnostics; psychological research on mental health and cognitive sequelae; and social and rehabilitation research addressing disability, return to work, and service delivery. Prominent institutions and key authors played a central role in knowledge production and collaboration networks. Notable gaps included limited studies on paediatric long COVID, scarce long-term outcome data from diverse populations and settings, and few rigorous evaluations of interventions and service models.
Conclusions
The long COVID research landscape from 2020 to 2025 is dynamic and increasingly collaborative, yet exhibits geographic and topical imbalances. To advance understanding and improve patient outcomes, stakeholders should support inclusive international collaborations, prioritise funding for underexplored populations and intervention trials, and accelerate translation of findings into clinical guidelines and integrated care models. Continued bibliometric monitoring will help target research investments and policy responses.
