Reviews on Long COVID: A scope of the literature.: Update July 2023

Claire Louise Khouja; Gary Austin Raine; Meena Khatwa; Melissa Harden; Katy Sutcliffe; Amanda Jayne Sowden

Reviews on Long COVID: A scope of the literature. Update July 2023

Claire Louise Khouja, Gary Austin Raine, Meena Khatwa, Melissa Harden, Katy Sutcliffe, Amanda Jayne Sowden

Centre for Reviews and Dissemination

Research output: Book/Report › Commissioned report

Abstract

Summary
• For this update, we identified 31 published reviews and 53 protocols for reviews on Long COVID. The number of published reviews is less than the number in our last quarterly report in April (n=37).
• Most published reviews were focused on the prevalence of symptoms or effects (16/31), which is consistent with the earlier reports.
• We identified more published reviews with a primary focus on Long COVID risk factors (6/31) than in April (3/37), and the same number on treatment or rehabilitation (n=5) for both reports.
• Most of the protocols focused on Long COVID treatment or rehabilitation (26/53), as was the case in the last two reports (29/73 and 33/56).
• Most of the other protocols focused on the prevalence of symptoms or effects (12/53), or risk factors with or without symptom prevalence (6/53).

Original language	English
Place of Publication	London
Publisher	EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, UCL Institute of Education, University College London.
Commissioning body	NIHR Policy Research Programme
Number of pages	29
ISBN (Electronic)	978-1-911605-46-1
Publication status	Published - Jul 2023

Bibliographical note

Access to Document

Review_update_July23_120923_LO
© Copyright 2023. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details
Final published version, 767 KB

Cite this

@book{aa09b9159a4848cdba83d4dea1548d5f,

title = "Reviews on Long COVID: A scope of the literature.: Update July 2023",

abstract = "Summary• For this update, we identified 31 published reviews and 53 protocols for reviews on Long COVID. The number of published reviews is less than the number in our last quarterly report in April (n=37).• Most published reviews were focused on the prevalence of symptoms or effects (16/31), which is consistent with the earlier reports.• We identified more published reviews with a primary focus on Long COVID risk factors (6/31) than in April (3/37), and the same number on treatment or rehabilitation (n=5) for both reports.• Most of the protocols focused on Long COVID treatment or rehabilitation (26/53), as was the case in the last two reports (29/73 and 33/56).• Most of the other protocols focused on the prevalence of symptoms or effects (12/53), or risk factors with or without symptom prevalence (6/53).",

author = "Khouja, {Claire Louise} and Raine, {Gary Austin} and Meena Khatwa and Melissa Harden and Katy Sutcliffe and Sowden, {Amanda Jayne}",

year = "2023",

month = jul,

language = "English",

publisher = "EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, UCL Institute of Education, University College London.",

}

TY - BOOK

T1 - Reviews on Long COVID: A scope of the literature.

T2 - Update July 2023

AU - Khouja, Claire Louise

AU - Raine, Gary Austin

AU - Khatwa, Meena

AU - Harden, Melissa

AU - Sutcliffe, Katy

AU - Sowden, Amanda Jayne

PY - 2023/7

Y1 - 2023/7

N2 - Summary• For this update, we identified 31 published reviews and 53 protocols for reviews on Long COVID. The number of published reviews is less than the number in our last quarterly report in April (n=37).• Most published reviews were focused on the prevalence of symptoms or effects (16/31), which is consistent with the earlier reports.• We identified more published reviews with a primary focus on Long COVID risk factors (6/31) than in April (3/37), and the same number on treatment or rehabilitation (n=5) for both reports.• Most of the protocols focused on Long COVID treatment or rehabilitation (26/53), as was the case in the last two reports (29/73 and 33/56).• Most of the other protocols focused on the prevalence of symptoms or effects (12/53), or risk factors with or without symptom prevalence (6/53).

AB - Summary• For this update, we identified 31 published reviews and 53 protocols for reviews on Long COVID. The number of published reviews is less than the number in our last quarterly report in April (n=37).• Most published reviews were focused on the prevalence of symptoms or effects (16/31), which is consistent with the earlier reports.• We identified more published reviews with a primary focus on Long COVID risk factors (6/31) than in April (3/37), and the same number on treatment or rehabilitation (n=5) for both reports.• Most of the protocols focused on Long COVID treatment or rehabilitation (26/53), as was the case in the last two reports (29/73 and 33/56).• Most of the other protocols focused on the prevalence of symptoms or effects (12/53), or risk factors with or without symptom prevalence (6/53).

M3 - Commissioned report

BT - Reviews on Long COVID: A scope of the literature.

PB - EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, UCL Institute of Education, University College London.

CY - London

ER -