ArticleCochrane evidence synthesis and methods2023
Effect of pharmacological interventions for the treatment of people with post-COVID-19 condition: A rapid review.
Article in Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Effectiveness and tolerance of exercise interventions for long COVID: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials.BMJ open · 2025Pooled it
- New directions beyond the boundaries of evidence synthesis.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2023Article
- Effect of pharmacological interventions for the treatment of people with post-COVID-19 condition: A rapid review.Cochrane evidence synthesis and methods · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: Little is known about the treatment of post-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) condition (PCC). This article examines the effectiveness of pharmacological interventions for treating people with PCC. Methods: We searched Medline, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials. gov, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. Two independent review authors screened citations, extracted data, and assessed the quality of the included studies. Due to heterogeneity in participants, interventions, and outcomes, we synthesized data narratively. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). Participants: People with PCC. Interventions: Pharmacological interventions include corticosteroids, ivabradine, and inhaled hydrogen. Outcome Measures: Olfactory function, sinus tachycardia, respiratory function. Results: We identified 5 completed studies and 41 ongoing studies. Oral corticosteroids and olfactory training had higher olfactory scores after 10 weeks (MD: 5.60, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.41 to 9.79). Patients allocated oral corticosteroid, and nasal irrigation demonstrated improved recovery of olfactory function compared with the control group at 40 days (median 60, interquartile range [IQR]: 40 vs. median 30, IQR: 25, Conclusions: The evidence is of low to very low certainty about the effect of all pharmacological interventions investigated for the treatment of people with PCC. There is currently a significant body of research underway that could expand the evidence to inform treatment decisions on pharmacological interventions for PCC.
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.