Post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 in a non-hospitalized cohort: Results from the Arizona CoVHORT

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Abstract

Clinical presentation, outcomes, and duration of COVID-19 has ranged dramatically. While some individuals recover quickly, others suffer from persistent symptoms, collectively known as long COVID, or post - acute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 (PASC). Most PASC research has focused on hospitalized COVID-19 patients with moderate to severe disease. We used data from a diverse population-based cohort of Arizonans to estimate prevalence of PASC, defined as experiencing at least one symptom 30 days or longer, and prevalence of individual symptoms. There were 303 non-hospitalized individuals with a positive lab-confirmed COVID-19 test who were followed for a median of 61 days (range 30–250). COVID-19 positive participants were mostly female (70%), non-Hispanic white (68%), and on average 44 years old. Prevalence of PASC at 30 days post-infection was 68.7% (95% confidence interval: 63.4, 73.9). The most common symptoms were fatigue (37.5%), shortness-of-breath (37.5%), brain fog (30.8%), and stress/anxiety (30.8%). The median number of symptoms was 3 (range 1–20). Amongst 157 participants with longer follow-up (≥60 days), PASC prevalence was 77.1%.

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.03.29.21254588: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementConsent: Informed consent was obtained from all participants.
    IRB: Ethics approval was obtained from the University of Arizona Institutional Review Board (Protocol #2003521636A002).
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    First, to account for potential dropout bias, where participants lost to follow-up may be less likely to experience PASC, we used multiple imputation (MI) with a delta adjustment, decreasing the likelihood of dropouts experiencing PASC by delta = 25%, 50%, and 75% (3).
    PASC
    suggested: (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:
    Our study also has limitations. Our response rate at follow-up was low (56%), and participants who completed follow-up questionnaires may differ from those who did not, possibly with a bias towards people who suffer from PASC. However, reported severity and having a pre-existing condition, both of which were associated with PASC, were similar between participants with and without follow-up. It is also possible that individuals suffering from severe PASC were too ill to complete follow-up surveys. We conducted a statistically principled sensitivity analysis for loss to follow-up, and still estimated a high prevalence of PASC (47.7% (delta=75%)). Our characterization of the PASC phenotype is limited to 25 symptoms; other researchers have included more symptoms in their assessment(9). Finally, we may have been underpowered to detect differences. COVID-19 has infected more than 110,000,000 individuals worldwide as of 1 March 2021 (10). If 63% (the lower limit of our 95% CI) of survivors experience persistent symptoms, over 63,000,000 individuals could be affected by the long-term consequences of COVID-19. Our estimate at ≥60 days follow-up showed that 50% of our participants were suffering from of 3 or more symptoms, with 25% experiencing 7 or more symptoms. These figures portend a public health challenge of massive scale. Further research is needed to characterize the clinical spectrum of PASC more completely in a variety of populations, including investigating correlates of PAS...

    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.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    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.