Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34624023›Full record

Observational studyPloS one2021

Impacts of mild COVID-19 on elevated use of primary and specialist health care services: A nationwide register study from Norway.

Katrine Damgaard Skyrud, Kjersti Helene Hernæs, Kjetil Elias Telle, Karin Magnusson

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Katrine Damgaard SkyrudNorwegian Institute of Public Health, Cluster for Health Services Research, Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-7504-9253
Kjersti Helene HernæsNorwegian Institute of Public Health, Cluster for Health Services Research, Oslo, Norway.
Kjetil Elias TelleNorwegian Institute of Public Health, Cluster for Health Services Research, Oslo, Norway.
Karin MagnussonNorwegian Institute of Public Health, Cluster for Health Services Research, Oslo, Norway.
Norwegian Institute of Public Health · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo explore the temporal impact of mild COVID-19 on need for primary and specialist health care services.

methodsIn all adults (≥20 years) tested for SARS-CoV-2 in Norway March 1st 2020 to February 1st 2021 (N = 1 401 922), we contrasted the monthly all-cause health care use before and up to 6 months after the test (% relative difference), for patients with a positive test for SARS-CoV-2 (non-hospitalization, i.e. mild COVID-19) and patients with a negative test (no COVID-19).

resultsWe found a substantial short-term elevation in primary care use in all age groups, with men generally having a higher relative increase (men 20-44 years: 522%, 95%CI = 509-535, 45-69 years: 439%, 95%CI = 426-452, ≥70 years: 199%, 95%CI = 180-218) than women (20-44 years: 342, 95%CI = 334-350, 45-69 years = 375, 95%CI = 365-385, ≥70 years: 156%, 95%CI = 141-171) at 1 month following positive test. At 2 months, this sex difference was less pronounced, with a (20-44 years: 21%, 95%CI = 13-29, 45-69 years = 38%, 95%CI = 30-46, ≥70 years: 15%, 95%CI = 3-28) increase in primary care use for men, and a (20-44 years: 30%, 95%CI = 24-36, 45-69 years = 57%, 95%CI = 50-64, ≥70 years: 14%, 95%CI = 4-24) increase for women. At 3 months after test, only women aged 45-70 years still had an increased primary care use (14%, 95%CI = 7-20). The increase was due to respiratory- and general/unspecified conditions. We observed no long-term (4-6 months) elevation in primary care use, and no elevation in specialist care use.

conclusionMild COVID-19 gives an elevated need for primary care that vanishes 2-3 months after positive test. Middle-aged women had the most prolonged increased primary care use.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CarePrimary Health CareRegistriesSARS-CoV-2AdultAgedCOVID-19FemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNorway

Identifiers

PMID34624023
PMCPMC8500442
OpenAlexW3202237538

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.