ArticlePLoS medicine2025
Effect of Paxlovid treatment during acute COVID-19 on Long COVID onset: An EHR-based target trial emulation from the N3C and RECOVER consortia.
Article in PLoS medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist prevents pulmonary fibrosis following acute COVID-19 infection associated with type 2 diabetes.Journal of virology · 2026Article
- Harmonization of Real-World Data for Vaccine-Preventable Infectious Diseases: Integration of SARS-CoV-2 Diagnostic and Serologic Data From Multiple Sources.Open forum infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Neuropeptide and cytokines expression in long COVID-19 related neuropsychological sequelae: insights into NK1R-mediated neuroinflammation andFrontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2026Article
- Risk of Post-COVID-19 Conditions Among Adolescents and Adults Who Received Nirmatrelvir-Ritonavir for Acute COVID-19: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Review
- Re-engineering a machine learning phenotype to adapt to the changing COVID-19 landscape: a machine learning modelling study from the N3C and RECOVER consortia.The Lancet. Digital health · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPreventing and treating post-acute sequelae of COVID-19 infection (PASC), commonly known as Long COVID, has become a public health priority. This study tests whether Paxlovid treatment in the acute phase of COVID-19 could help prevent the onset of PASC. METHODS AND
findingsWe used electronic health records from the National Clinical Cohort Collaborative to define a cohort of 445,738 patients who had COVID-19 since April 1, 2022, and were eligible for Paxlovid treatment due to risk for progression to severe COVID-19. We used the target trial emulation framework to estimate the effect of Paxlovid treatment on PASC incidence. We emulated a series of six sequential trials: one for each day of a 5-day treatment grace period. For each sequential trial, the treatment group was defined as patients prescribed Paxlovid on the trial start day, and the control group was defined as all patients meeting eligibility criteria who remained untreated on the trial start day. We pooled individual record-level data from the sequential trials for analysis. The follow-up period was 180 days. The primary outcome was overall PASC incidence measured using a computable phenotype. Secondary outcomes were incident cognitive, fatigue, and respiratory symptoms in the post-acute period. We controlled for a wide range of demographic and medical history covariates. Compared to the control group, Paxlovid treatment did not have a significant effect on overall PASC incidence or incident respiratory symptoms. It had a small protective effect against cognitive (relative risk [RR] 0.91; 95% CI [0.84, 0.98]; p = 0.019) and fatigue (RR 0.94; 95% CI [0.90, 0.98]; p = 0.002) symptoms. Finally, we estimated Paxlovid's effect on overall PASC incidence across strata of age, COVID-19 vaccination status, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) prior to COVID-19. We found small protective effects among patients aged 65 years or more (RR 0.92; 95% CI [0.88, 0.97]; p < 0.001; absolute risk difference [ARD] -0.43%; number needed to treat [NNT] 233) and with a CCI of 3 or 4 (RR 0.83; 95% CI [0.75, 0.92]; p < 0.001; ARD -1.30%; NNT 76). This study's main limitation is that the causal interpretation relies on the assumption that we controlled for all confounding variables.
conclusionsAlthough some prior observational studies suggested that Paxlovid held promise as a PASC preventive, this study-with a large, nationally sampled cohort; a contemporary study period; and causal inference methodology-found that Paxlovid treatment during acute COVID-19 had no effect on subsequent PASC incidence. Stratified analyses suggest that Paxlovid may have a small protective effect among higher-risk patients, but the NNT is high. In conclusion, we see Paxlovid as unlikely to become a definitive solution for PASC prevention.
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.