ArticleJournal of internal medicine2026
Change in healthcare utilization before and after COVID-19 using data from 1.5 million individuals.
Article in Journal of internal medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Antigenic and Molecular Genetic Evolution of Influenza Viruses in Kazakhstan from 2017 to 2025.Biology · 2026Article
- Change in healthcare utilization before and after COVID-19 using data from 1.5 million individuals.Journal of internal medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivePost-infectious sequelae can increase burden on healthcare systems. We aimed to assess the long-term effect of COVID-19 on healthcare utilization across all levels of care.
methodsIn this register-based cohort study, we included all adult (≥18 years) residents in Sweden's two largest counties with a registered COVID-19 index date between 31 January 2020 and 9 February 2022. Each exposed individual was matched 1:1 to a control without registered COVID-19 on index date based on gender, birth year, vaccination status and the change in number of healthcare contacts between 2018 and 2019. We counted the number of healthcare contacts across all levels of care during the pre-index (13-1 months) and post-index (4-15 months) full-year periods. A difference-in-difference (DID) analysis was used to assess changes in the number of healthcare contacts and specific diagnoses, between each individual's pre- and post-periods, as well as comparing individuals with and without COVID-19.
resultsThe study included 753,905 matched pairs, comprising 1,415,432 unique individuals. Trends in healthcare contacts were parallel between the matched groups prior to the index date. The DID analysis revealed a mean increase of 0.33 (95%CI 0.30-0.36) healthcare contacts following COVID-19, mainly observed from a smaller proportion of the population (5%) and by contacts with primary healthcare. The largest diagnosis-specific difference was observed for reactions to severe stress (0.02, 0.01-0.03). The estimate varied across gender, acute COVID-19 severity, virus variant period and vaccination status.
conclusionThis study demonstrates increased healthcare utilization after COVID-19 in a smaller proportion of the population.
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.