ArticleEClinicalMedicine2023
Forming a consensus opinion to inform long COVID support mechanisms and interventions: a modified Delphi approach.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical practice guidelines and expert consensus statements on rehabilitation for patients with COVID-19: a systematic review.BMJ open · 2024Pooled it
- Effects of a respiratory and neurological rehabilitation treatment plan in post Covid-19 affected university students. Randomized clinical study.Chronic respiratory diseaseTrial
- Integrating real-time polling into modified Delphi methodology: lessons from a consensus study on cardiac implantable electronic device remote monitoring.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Article
- Submaximal 2-day cardiopulmonary exercise testing to assess exercise capacity and post-exertional symptom exacerbation in people with long COVID.Experimental physiology · 2026Article
- Developing a minimum dataset for a national patient registry on Long COVID in Canada: a Delphi consensus-based study.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Trajectories of Health-Related Quality of Life 2 Years After Mild/Moderate Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Infection in the Pre-Omicron Era.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Unveiling Post-COVID-19 syndrome: incidence, biomarkers, and clinical phenotypes in a Thai population.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Long COVID Clinical Severity Types Based on Symptoms and Functional Disability: A Longitudinal Evaluation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- "Long COVID" and Its Impact on The Environment: Emerging Concerns and Perspectives.Environmental management · 2024Review
- Adalimumab in the management of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis: Results from a Delphi investigation.Rheumatology and immunology research · 2024Article
- Reaching out to Patients with Long COVID to Better Understand Their Life Experiences and How to Support Their Recovery: A Patient-Oriented Knowledge Sharing Session.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Current approaches to support patients living with post-COVID condition, also known as Long COVID, are highly disparate with limited success in managing or resolving a well-documented and long-standing symptom burden. With approximately 2.1 million people living with the condition in the UK alone and millions more worldwide, there is a desperate need to devise support strategies and interventions for patients. Methods: A three-round Delphi consensus methodology was distributed internationally using an online survey and was completed by healthcare professionals (including clinicians, physiotherapists, and general practitioners), people with long COVID, and long COVID academic researchers (round 1 n = 273, round 2 n = 186, round 3 n = 138). Across the three rounds, respondents were located predominantly in the United Kingdom (UK), with 17.3-15.2% (round 1, n = 47; round 2 n = 32, round 2 n = 21) of respondents located elsewhere (United States of America (USA), Austria, Malta, United Arab Emirates (UAE), Finland, Norway, Malta, Netherlands, Iceland, Canada, Tunisie, Brazil, Hungary, Greece, France, Austrailia, South Africa, Serbia, and India). Respondents were given ∼5 weeks to complete the survey following enrolment, with round one taking place from 02/15/2022 to 03/28/22, round two; 05/09/2022 to 06/26/2022, and round 3; 07/14/2022 to 08/09/2022. A 5-point Likert scale of agreement was used and the opportunity to include free text responses was provided in the first round. Findings: Fifty-five statements reached consensus (defined as >80% agree and strongly agree), across the domains of i) long COVID as a condition, ii) current support and care available for long COVID, iii) clinical assessments for long COVID, and iv) support mechanisms and rehabilitation interventions for long COVID, further sub-categorised by consideration, inclusion, and focus. Consensus reached proposes that long COVID requires specialised, comprehensive support mechanisms and that interventions should form a personalised care plan guided by the needs of the patients. Supportive approaches should focus on individual symptoms, including but not limited to fatigue, cognitive dysfunction, and dyspnoea, utilising pacing, fatigue management, and support returning to daily activities. The mental impact of living with long COVID, tolerance to physical activity, emotional distress and well-being, and research of pre-existing conditions with similar symptoms, such as myalgic encephalomyelitis, should also be considered when supporting people with long COVID. Interpretation: We provide an outline that achieved consensus with stakeholders that could be used to inform the design and implementation of bespoke long COVID support mechanisms. Funding: None.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.