SynthesisBMC pediatrics2026
Understanding heterogeneity in paediatric long COVID research: an overview of reviews and recommendations for future pandemics.
Synthesis in BMC pediatrics, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStudies of Long COVID or Post-COVID-19 condition in children and young people have varied considerably in their reported prevalences. We aimed to examine the methodological heterogeneity underlying this variability and explore whether methodological characteristics were correlated with reported Long COVID outcome prevalence, in order to inform recommendations to improve reporting in future pandemic-related epidemiological research.
methodsWe conducted an overview of reviews with a narrative synthesis, identifying systematic reviews and meta-analyses and extracting their included primary studies. We identified reviews of Long COVID in children & young people in PubMed and Embase using a systematic search strategy. We extracted key methodological details including study design, sample size, sample and control group characteristics, data collection and reporting methods, as well as time-point(s) of surveying and frequency of follow-up. We explored correlations between these factors and prevalence of Long COVID via Spearman's rank correlation coefficients or the Kruskal-Wallis test.
results69 studies, from identified reviews, met the inclusion criteria with outcome symptom prevalence varying between 0 and 90% at > 3-months post-COVID-19 infection. Only 19% of studies used an established Long COVID definition to guide analyses. There was substantial heterogeneity in the design and outcome reporting of Long COVID studies. We did not find Long COVID prevalence varied by examined methodological factors (p ≥ 0.08 for all correlations).
conclusionWhile substantial methodological heterogeneity was observed across studies of paediatric Long COVID, no statistically significant correlations were identified between examined methodological factors and reported prevalence. Such variability limits comparability across studies and highlights the need for more standardised definitions, outcome measures, and reporting approaches in future pandemic-related epidemiological research: we discuss reporting guidelines and recommendations for future paediatric epidemiological research during a pandemic.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42399828What 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.