Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39764180›Full record

ArticleEClinicalMedicine2024

Psychological factors associated with Long COVID: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Petra Engelmann, Max Reinke, Clara Stein, Stefan Salzmann, Bernd Löwe, Anne Toussaint, Meike Shedden-Mora

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed
–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

44 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  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

7 authors.

Petra EngelmannDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Max ReinkeDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Clara SteinDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Stefan SalzmannDivision of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Philipps-University Marburg, Marburg, Germany.
Bernd LöweDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Anne ToussaintDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Meike Shedden-MoraDepartment of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Despite the immense impact of Long COVID on public health and those affected, its aetiology remains poorly understood. Findings suggest that psychological factors such as depression contribute to symptom persistence alongside pathophysiological mechanisms, but knowledge of their relative importance is limited. This study aimed to synthesise the current evidence on psychological factors potentially associated with Long COVID and condition-relevant outcomes like quality of life. Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for peer-reviewed studies published in English from 2019 to January 2, 2024. Studies providing cross-sectional or longitudinal data on the association between at least one psychological variable and the presence of Long COVID (primary outcome) or condition-relevant secondary outcomes (symptom severity, impairment, quality of life, and healthcare utilisation) were included. Psychological constructs with at least five comparisons were pooled as odds ratio (OR) for categorical data and standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous data in random-effects meta-analyses of cross-sectional studies with control groups. This review is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42023408320. Findings: 113 studies (n = 312,831 patients with Long COVID) provided data on at least one psychological variable, 63 in cross-sectional group comparisons, 53 in cross-sectional associations, and 18 longitudinal. Most reported findings related to depression and anxiety, and - less frequently - to physical activity, posttraumatic stress disorder, stress, and history of mental illness. Depression (OR 2.35; 95% CI, 1.49-3.70) and anxiety (OR 2.53; 95% CI, 1.76-3.61) were significantly associated with Long COVID and higher in affected patients than controls (depression: SMD 0.88; 95% CI, 0.66-1.11; anxiety: SMD 0.74; 95% CI, 0.50-0.99), while results for physical activity and stress were non-significant. In most prospective studies, the investigated psychological constructs significantly predicted Long COVID. Interpretation: Evidence suggests depression and anxiety to be co-occurring phenomena and predictive factors of Long COVID. Future studies should prospectively investigate psychological constructs such as emotion regulation or dysfunctional symptom expectations, which are well-known risk factors and therapeutic targets of persistent somatic symptoms in other medical conditions, but are so far understudied in Long COVID. Funding: None.

Indexed as

Biopsychosocial modelLong COVIDPersistent somatic symptomsPost COVID-19 conditionPsychological factors

Identifiers

PMID39764180
PMCPMC11701445

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.