ArticlePloS one2026
A mixed-methods analysis of the implementation of a new community long-COVID service during the 2020 pandemic: Learning from practice.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe rapidly increasing prevalence of long-COVID (LC), a condition characterised by multisystem complexity and high patient symptom burden, posed an immediate need to develop new clinics for assessment and management. This article reports on the rapid implementation of a reactive and responsive LC care pathway. We mapped patients' journeys through this pathway, identifying the services that were activated according to prevalent symptoms, and used the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to assess the barriers and facilitators to its implementation and delivery, from the perspective of health care professionals (HCPs) and LC patients.
methodsMixed methods study, including retrospective quantitative cross-sectional analysis of patient data and semi-structured qualitative interviews. One hundred and sixteen patients who attended the long-COVID clinic in Hertfordshire, UK, in the first 5 months of its existence and consented for their data to be analysed. Six HCPs and five patients participated in semi-structured interviews.
resultsPatients were referred into the service an average of 5.75 months post initial COVID-19 infection. 82% of patients required onward referral to other HCPs, most commonly pulmonary rehabilitation, chronic fatigue specialists, and a specialist COVID-19 rehab general practitioner embedded within the service. Patients reported having rehabilitation needs, moderate depression and anxiety, and difficulties performing usual activities for daily living. The TDF domains most relevant to the implementation of the LC pathway were beliefs about capabilities, environmental context and resources, knowledge, and reinforcement. DISCUSSION: Our study provides novel insight into the development of a reactive multidisciplinary care pathway. Key drivers for successful implementation of LC services were identified, such as leadership, multidisciplinary teamwork, transferable skills, and knowledge exchange. Barriers to rapid set up of the service included funding constraints and the rapid evolution of an emergency context.
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.