Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37981717›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of epidemiology2024

Postacute symptoms 4 months after SARS-CoV-2 infection during the Omicron period: a nationwide Danish questionnaire study.

Lampros Spiliopoulos, Anna Irene Vedel Sørensen, Peter Bager, Nete Munk Nielsen, Jørgen Vinsløv Hansen, Anders Koch, Inger Kristine Meder, Poul Videbech, Steen Ethelberg, Anders Hviid

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of epidemiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 14 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Lampros SpiliopoulosDepartment of Epidemiology Research, Statens Serum Institut, 2300 Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0001-9668-3587
Anna Irene Vedel SørensenDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Prevention, Statens Serum Institut, 2300 Copenhagen, Denmark.
Peter BagerDepartment of Epidemiology Research, Statens Serum Institut, 2300 Copenhagen, Denmark.
Nete Munk NielsenDepartment of Epidemiology Research, Statens Serum Institut, 2300 Copenhagen, Denmark.
Jørgen Vinsløv HansenDepartment of Epidemiology Research, Statens Serum Institut, 2300 Copenhagen, Denmark.
Anders KochDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Prevention, Statens Serum Institut, 2300 Copenhagen, Denmark.
Inger Kristine MederDepartment of Epidemiology Research, Statens Serum Institut, 2300 Copenhagen, Denmark.
Poul VidebechCentre for Neuropsychiatric Depression Research, Mental Health Centre Glostrup, 2600 Glostrup, Denmark.
Steen EthelbergDepartment of Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Prevention, Statens Serum Institut, 2300 Copenhagen, Denmark.
Anders HviidDepartment of Epidemiology Research, Statens Serum Institut, 2300 Copenhagen, Denmark.

Funding

Danish Ministry of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Postacute symptoms are not uncommon after severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection with pre-Omicron variants. How the Omicron variant and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) booster vaccination influence the risk of postacute symptoms is less clear. We analyzed data from a nationwide Danish questionnaire study, EFTER-COVID, comprising 36 109 individuals aged ≥15 years who were tested between July 2021 and January 2022, to evaluate the associations of the Omicron variant and COVID-19 booster vaccination with postacute symptoms and new-onset general health problems 4 months after infection with SARS-CoV-2. Risk differences (RDs) were estimated by comparing Omicron cases with controls, comparing Omicron cases with Delta cases, and comparing Omicron cases vaccinated with 3 doses with those vaccinated with 2 doses, adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, self-reported chronic diseases, Charlson comorbidity index, health-care occupation, and vaccination status. Four months after testing for SARS-CoV-2 during the Omicron period, cases experienced substantial postacute symptoms and new-onset health problems in comparison with controls; the largest RD was observed for memory issues (RD = 7.4%; 95% CI, 6.4-8.3). However, risks were generally lower than those in the Delta period, particularly for dysosmia (RD = -15.0%; 95% CI, -17.0 to -13.2) and dysgeusia (RD = -11.2%; 95% CI, -13.2 to -9.5). Booster vaccination was associated with fewer postacute symptoms and new-onset health problems 4 months after Omicron infection as compared with 2 doses of COVID-19 vaccine.

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesPost-Acute COVID-19 SyndromeSARS-CoV-2AdolescentAdultAgedDenmarkFemaleHumansImmunization, SecondaryMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultCOVID-19 Vaccinesbooster vaccinationcoronavirus disease 2019COVID-19long COVIDpostacute symptomatologySARS-CoV-2SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variantsevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2

Identifiers

PMID37981717
PMCPMC11299024

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.