Correlates of long-COVID-19: the role of demographics, chronic illness, and psychiatric diagnosis in an urban sample 2023 Schulder et al

[Andy]

ABSTRACT

Long-COVID-19 symptoms are an emerging public health issue. This study sought to investigate demographics, chronic illness, and probable psychiatric diagnoses as correlates for long-COVID-19 in an urban adult sample. Self-report Qualtrics surveys were sent to students across City University of New York (CUNY) campuses in New York City in Winter 2021–2022. Binary logistic regressions were used to assess the relation of a range of factors with endorsement of long-COVID-19. Results demonstrated that Latinx participants endorsed higher odds of long-COVID-19, as compared to non-Latinx white participants. Participants who endorsed having a prior chronic illness and those who met the cut-off for probable psychiatric diagnoses all endorsed higher odds of long-COVID-19. Long-COVID-19 may be more likely among specific subpopulations and among persons with other ongoing physical and mental illness.

Paywall, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13548506.2023.2177684

 

[Hutan]

These studies are all blurring into one another.

Hard to tell from that brief abstract, but it looks as though these authors made the basic error of assuming Long Covid is one thing. If you don't separate the different sorts of Covid-19 sequelae (e.g. post-ventilator damage, heart damage etc) and unrelated health issues also, then you just end up with a mush of data.

So, this is looking pretty much like a waste of time. Worse than that really, something that contributes to the idea that Long Covid is just something that those other people get. Most of the decisions-makers (those who are non-Latino, healthy, having no mental health issues) feel safe, and so don't feel the need to do something.