Outcomes among confirmed cases and a matched comparison group in the Long-COVID in Scotland study
Abstract
With increasing numbers infected by SARS-CoV-2, understanding long-COVID is essential to inform health and social care support. A Scottish population cohort of 33,281 laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections and 62,957 never-infected individuals were followed-up via 6, 12 and 18-month questionnaires and linkage to hospitalization and death records. Of the 31,486 symptomatic infections,1,856 (6%) had not recovered and 13,350 (42%) only partially. No recovery was associated with hospitalized infection, age, female sex, deprivation, respiratory disease, depression and multimorbidity. Previous symptomatic infection was associated with poorer quality of life, impairment across all daily activities and 24 persistent symptoms including breathlessness (OR 3.43, 95% CI 3.29–3.58), palpitations (OR 2.51, OR 2.36–2.66), chest pain (OR 2.09, 95% CI 1.96–2.23), and confusion (OR 2.92, 95% CI 2.78–3.07). Asymptomatic infection was not associated with adverse outcomes. Vaccination was associated with reduced risk of seven symptoms. Here we describe the nature of long-COVID and the factors associated with it.
Notes
- 16% response rate (15% after exclusions) so may underestimate recovery - they don’t mention/seem to consider selection bias
- mostly working age or younger; mostly unvaccinated
- lots of models
- not sure how they conclude this: ”… suggesting possible protection against persistent symptoms from even partial vaccination…”
- ”… long-COVID is specific to people with symptomatic infections…” - later they say “The three most common symptoms among people previously infected were also reported by 16–32% of people never infected.” So not that specific.
- ”… higher rates of recovery among black and South Asian participants…”: ? their deduction from one of the tables - edit: turns out this was an error in the first published version: Author Correction: Outcomes among confirmed cases and a matched comparison group in the Long-COVID in Scotland study | Nature Communications
- they’ve obviously done a huge amount of work but it is still at high risk of selection bias and they may go too far with some of their conclusions