ArticlePeerJ2024
Biological factors associated with long COVID and comparative analysis of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein variants: a retrospective study in Thailand.
Article in PeerJ, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A narrative review of SARS-CoV-2 variants and long COVID.Journal of thoracic disease · 2026Review
- A retrospective cohort study of viral and sociodemographic determinants of long COVID among Idaho veterans.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Review
- Evaluation of the Mutational Preferences Throughout the Whole Genome of the Identified Variants of the SARS-CoV-2 Virus Isolates in Bangladesh.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Post-acute COVID-19 syndrome (long COVID) refers to the persistence of COVID-19 symptoms or exceptional symptoms following recovery. Even without conferring fatality, it represents a significant global public health burden. Despite many reports on long COVID, the prevalence and data on associated biological factors remain unclear and limited. This research aimed to determine the prevalence of long COVID during the two distinct epidemic periods in Thailand, due to the Delta and Omicron variants of SARS-CoV-2, and to investigate the biological factors associated with long COVID. In addition, the spike protein amino acid sequences of the Delta and Omicron variants were compared to determine the frequency of mutations and their potential biological implications. Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional study was established to recruit confirmed COVID-19 participants at Maharat Nakhon Ratchasima Hospital who had recovered for at least three months and were infected between June 2021 and August 2022. The demographic data and long COVID experience were collected via telephone interview. The biological factors were analyzed through binary logistic regression. The datasets of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein amino acid sequence of the Delta and Omicron variants in Thailand were retrieved from GIDSAID to determine mutation frequencies and to identify possible roles of the mutations based on published data. Results: Data was collected from a total of 247 participants comprising 106 and 141 participants of the Delta and Omicron epidemic periods, respectively. Apart from the COVID-19 severity and health status, the baseline participant data of the two time periods were remarkably similar. The prevalence of long COVID observed in the Omicron period was higher than in the Delta period (74.5% Conclusion: This study revealed informative data associated with long COVID in Thailand. More attention should be given to long COVID caused by unique virus variants and other biological factors to prepare a healthcare management strategy for COVID-19 patients after recovery.
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.