Impact of long-term COVID on workers: A systematic review protocol

  1. Camila Bruneli do Prado
  2. Giselly Storch Emerick
  3. Luciana Bicalho Cevolani Pires
  4. Luciane Bresciani Salaroli

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

Part of the patients infected by COVID-19 have at least one lasting sequel of the disease and may be framed in the concept of long Covid. These sequelae can compromise the quality of life, increase dependence on other people for personal care, impair the performance of activities of daily living, thus compromising work activities and harming the health of the worker. This protocol aims to critically synthesize the scientific evidence on the effects of Covid-19 among workers and its impact on their health status and professional life.

Method

Searches will be performed in MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library Central, Web of Science, Scopus, LILACS and Epistemonikos. Included studies will be those that report the prevalence of long-term signs and symptoms in workers and/or the impact on their health status and work performance, which may be associated with Covid-19 infection. Data extraction will be conducted by 3 reviewers independently. For data synthesis, a results report will be carried out, based on the main outcome of this study.

Discussion

This review will provide evidence to support health surveillance to help decision makers (i.e. healthcare providers, stakeholders and governments) regarding long-term Covid.

Trial registration

PROSPERO registration number : CRD42021288120 . https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021288120 .

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1371/journal.pone.0265705
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2022.03.07.22272051: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsIRB: Ethics and disclosure: Due to the characteristics of the design of this study, approval by the ethics committee was not necessary.
    Sex as a biological variableWith regard to the characteristics of the population, workers of both sexes and of any ethnicity will be included.
    RandomizationWith regard to study design, primary research studies will be included, including observational studies (e.g. prospective cohort studies, retrospective case reviews), intervention studies (e.g. randomized controlled trials, single-arm studies) and systematic reviews.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    The search strategy will be carried out through 07 specialized and general databases, from the beginning until April 30, 2021: Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE) via Pubmed, EMBASE
    MEDLINE
    suggested: (MEDLINE, RRID:SCR_002185)
    Pubmed
    suggested: (PubMed, RRID:SCR_004846)
    EMBASE
    suggested: (EMBASE, RRID:SCR_001650)
    Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, Latin American and Caribbean Literature in Health Sciences (LILACS) and Epistemonikos.
    Cochrane Library
    suggested: (Cochrane Library, RRID:SCR_013000)
    ) - Global Literature on Coronavirus Disease,, Google Scholar and medRXiv.
    Google Scholar
    suggested: (Google Scholar, RRID:SCR_008878)
    EndNote bibliographic software will be used to store, organize and manage all references and ensure a systematic and comprehensive search.
    EndNote
    suggested: (EndNote, RRID:SCR_014001)
    The preliminary pilot search strategy combining MeSH terms, synonyms, and keywords to be used in MEDLINE/PubMed is detailed in Table 1.
    MeSH
    suggested: (MeSH, RRID:SCR_004750)

    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: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    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.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.

    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 10.1101/2022.03.07.22272051 on medRxiv