Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36284829›Full record

ArticleERJ open research2022

Symptoms persisting after hospitalisation for COVID-19: 12 months interim results of the CO-FLOW study.

L Martine Bek, Julia C Berentschot, Majanka H Heijenbrok-Kal, Susanne Huijts, Michel E van Genderen, J Hans Vlake, Jasper van Bommel, Joachim G J V Aerts, Gerard M Ribbers, Rita J G van den Berg-Emons and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ERJ open research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
4.2field-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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Global prevalence of post-COVID-19 condition: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective evidence.Health promotion and chronic disease prevention in Canada : research, policy and practice · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

L Martine BekDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8257-7070
Julia C BerentschotDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Majanka H Heijenbrok-KalDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2982-4404
Susanne HuijtsDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6652-6254
Michel E van GenderenDepartment of Intensive Care, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5668-3435
J Hans VlakeDepartment of Intensive Care, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Jasper van BommelDepartment of Intensive Care, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8408-0500
Joachim G J V AertsDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6662-2951
Gerard M RibbersDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6114-349X
Rita J G van den Berg-EmonsDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6433-3398
Merel E HellemonsDepartment of Respiratory Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6666-5027
Erasmus MC · NLCodarts Rotterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: A large proportion of patients experience a wide range of sequelae after acute COVID-19, especially after severe illness. The long-term health sequelae need to be assessed. Our objective was to longitudinally assess persistence of symptoms and clusters of symptoms up to 12 months after hospitalisation for COVID-19 and to assess determinants of the main persistent symptoms. Methods: In this multicenter prospective cohort study patients with COVID-19 are followed up for 2 years with measurements at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after hospital discharge. Here, we present interim results regarding persistent symptoms up to 12 months. Results: We included 492 patients; mean±sd age was 60.2±10.7 years, 335 (68.1%) were males, median length of hospital stay was 11 (6.0-27.0) days. At 3 months after discharge 97.0% of the patients had at least one persisting symptom, this declined to 95.5% and 92.0% at 6 and 12 months, respectively (p=0.010). Muscle weakness, exertional dyspnoea, fatigue, and memory and concentration problems were the most prevalent symptoms with rates over 50% during follow-up. Over time, muscle weakness, hair loss and exertional dyspnoea decreased significantly (p<0.001), while other symptoms such as fatigue, concentration and memory problems, anosmia and ageusia persisted. Symptoms from the physical and respiratory cluster declined significantly over time, in contrast to the fatigue and cognitive symptom clusters. Conclusion: The majority of patients experienced COVID-19 sequelae up to 12 months after severe infection. Whereas physical and respiratory symptoms showed slow gradual decline, fatigue and cognitive symptoms did not evidently resolve over time.

Identifiers

PMID36284829
PMCPMC9421428
OpenAlexW4293224836

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.