ArticlePublic health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974)2025
Methodology for a COVID-19 Recovery Surveillance Study Conducted Through an Academic-State Partnership.
Article in Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974), 2025. 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.
- Article
- Sex differences in the prospective associations of long COVID with incident cardiometabolic and respiratory diseases from a population-based longitudinal study in Michigan.Preventive medicine reports · 2026Article
- Prospective associations between Long COVID and mental health: evidence from a population-based study with a nearly three-year follow-up.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Minority health social vulnerability index and long COVID illness among a statewide, population-based study of adults with polymerase chain reaction-confirmed SARS-CoV-2.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWe describe the methodologic approach to rapidly launching a population-based surveillance study in spring 2020 to examine the lasting physical, mental, and economic effect of COVID-19 among adults in Michigan. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe established a partnership between the University of Michigan School of Public Health and the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services to conduct this study. Using a sequential stratified sampling strategy, we randomly selected adults with polymerase chain reaction-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in the Michigan Disease Surveillance System. From 2020 through 2022, respondents completed detailed surveys on the lasting effect of their COVID-19 illness online in English or by telephone in English, Spanish, or Arabic, reflecting the diverse population in Michigan. We created and used sampling weights to reduce survey nonresponse bias and tested the performance of the weights with a nonresponse bias analysis.
resultsOf all sampled people (n = 17 584), 5521 completed our baseline survey a median of 4.5 months after their COVID-19 onset, for a response rate of 32.1%. Most respondents completed the survey online in every region except Detroit, where 67.1% completed the survey by telephone, highlighting the importance of multimode surveys to increase accessibility and generalizability. Our findings suggest minimal nonresponse bias in the weighted baseline sample. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: This unique academic-state partnership resulted in timely and actionable findings related to the lasting effect of COVID-19 that were unavailable elsewhere. While this effort was successful, it was built out of necessity given the limited resources available to local and state health departments to conduct surveillance during the COVID-19 pandemic.
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.