1. Sign our petition calling on Cochrane to withdraw their review of Exercise Therapy for CFS here.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Guest, the 'News in Brief' for the week beginning 18th March 2024 is here.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Welcome! To read the Core Purpose and Values of our forum, click here.
    Dismiss Notice

Self-reported symptom severity, general health, and impairment in post-acute phases of COVID-19, 2022, Larsson et al

Discussion in 'Long Covid research' started by mango, Nov 27, 2022.

  1. mango

    mango Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,505
    Self-reported symptom severity, general health, and impairment in post-acute phases of COVID-19: retrospective cohort study of Swedish public employees

    Simon B. Larsson, Gustaf Stukát von Feilitzen, Maria E. Andersson, Per Sikora, Magnus Lindh, Rickard Nordén, Staffan Nilsson & Robert Sigström

    Abstract

    This study aimed to examine current symptom severity and general health in a sample of primarily non-hospitalized persons with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) confirmed COVID-19 in comparison to PCR negative controls.

    During the first quarter of 2021, we conducted an online survey among public employees in West Sweden, with a valid COVID-19 test result. The survey assessed past-month severity of 28 symptoms and signs, self-rated health, the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0 and illness severity at the time of test. We linked participants’ responses to their SARS-CoV-2 PCR tests results.

    We compared COVID-19 positive and negative participants using univariable and multivariable regression analyses.

    Out of 56,221 invited, 14,222 (25.3%) responded, with a response rate of 50% among SARS-CoV-2 positive individuals. Analysis included 10,194 participants (86.4% women, mean age 45 years) who tested positive 4–12 weeks (N = 1425; subacute) and > 12 weeks (N = 1584; postcovid) prior to the survey, and 7185 PCR negative participants who did not believe that they had had COVID-19.

    Symptoms were highly prevalent in all groups, with worst symptoms in subacute phase participants, followed by postcovid phase and PCR negative participants. The most specific symptom for COVID-19 was loss of smell or taste.

    Both WHODAS 2.0 score and self-rated health were worst in subacute participants, and modestly worse in postcovid participants than in negative controls.

    Female gender, older age and acute illness severity had larger effects on self-rated health and WHODAS 2.0 score in PCR positive participants than in PCR negative.

    Studies with longer follow-up are needed to determine the long-term improvement after COVID-19.

    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-24307-1
     
    Peter Trewhitt and Andy like this.
  2. mango

    mango Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    2,505
    Swedish news article about the study:

    Ny undersökning: Två av tre covidsmittade inom vården fick långvariga besvär
    https://sverigesradio.se/artikel/ny...idsmittade-inom-varden-fick-langvariga-besvar
     
    Peter Trewhitt and Andy like this.
  3. rvallee

    rvallee Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Messages:
    12,299
    Location:
    Canada
    Is this seriously the best the experts can do after all this time? Seriously? Everyone whined at first about how self-reports are invalid, and yet this is all they do anyway, obviously as symptoms can only be self-reported by definition, and they do it far worse than patient-led studies because they don't know how to ask questions that have any depth, only the most superficial associations between pooled data.

    This kind of approach is only good at giving very preliminary and flimsy data. Where the hell are the comprehensive studies? Is there no moving from preliminary work that cannot tell us anything? It just gets a bit bigger but ultimately it's the exact same as patient community studies, except worse in usefulness? All still trying desperately to find nothing and wanting to move on like nothing happened.

    Imagine taking this approach to study, say damage caused by tornadoes. You survey areas and find almost no significant damage, since it's very concentrated in a line that twists around a lot but covers very little total area. The usefulness even disappears as it gets bigger, since you cover more areas that were not hit by tornadoes and thus the relative size of the areas affected is smaller.

    And still caught at the trap of a larger % of a small number amounting to less than a smaller % from a much larger base. Yes, severity of acute illness is a good individual indicator of risk, it tells us precisely nothing when the vast majority of cases are never hospitalized. It's something like 5% or so?

    Extending the same idea to a public attack, where a handful of victims were hurt by an attacker, and a few others have sprained ankles or bumps from running away, it would conclude that basically nothing happened compared to similar events where there will likely be the odd limp, dehydration or disorderly conduct. This approach makes no sense. It sure explains why no progress at all is happening.
     
    Sean and alktipping like this.

Share This Page