ArticleERJ open research2024
A worldwide look into long COVID-19 management: an END-COVID survey.
Article in ERJ open research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficacy and safety of combined nebulization of unfractionated heparin, acetylcysteine, budesonide and ipratropium bromide in hospitalised patients with COVID-19 pneumonia: a randomized controlled clinical trial.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2025Trial
- 'What Do People With Long Covid Want From Healthcare Services?' A Qualitative Exploration From Lived Experience.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
- Outcomes of Patients with Neurocognitive Symptoms Attending a Long COVID Clinic: A Longitudinal Cohort Study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- SPACO+: a mixed methods protocol to assessing the effectiveness of an educative intervention in patients with Long Covid.BMC infectious diseases · 2025Article
- A worldwide perspective of long COVID management: how can we END-COVID?ERJ open research · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Long COVID is a heterogeneous clinical syndrome characterised by a variety of reported symptoms and signs. Its clinical management is expected to differ significantly worldwide. Methods: A survey-based study investigating long COVID-related standard operating procedures (SOPs) has been conducted by the European Respiratory Society (ERS) END-COVID clinical research collaboration with the support of other international societies (ALAT, APSR, CHEST, ESCMID and PATS). A global analysis of the results is provided here, alongside sub-population analysis based on continents, national income levels, type of involved healthcare professional and inclusion or exclusion of paediatric patients. Findings: 1015 healthcare professionals from 110 different countries worldwide participated in this study, the majority of them being respiratory physicians (60.6%). A dedicated long COVID programme was present in 55.4% of the investigated institutions, with hospital admission during the acute infection being the main inclusion criteria to access them. Consistent differences in long COVID-related procedures were identified among centres, mainly regarding the multidisciplinary approach, the availability of telemedicine and psychological support, the type of requested exams and the total amount of visits in the centre. Interpretation: Long COVID management shows important differences related to geographical areas and national income levels. SOPs were significantly different when centres were managed by a pulmonologist or when paediatric patients were included.
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.