Back

Prevalence of long-term symptoms varies by using different post-COVID-19 definitions in positively and negatively tested adults: the PRIME post-COVID study

Pagen, D. M.; van Bilsen, C. J.; Brinkhues, S.; Van Herck, M.; Konings, K.; den Heijer, C. D.; ter Waarbeek, H. L.; Spruit, M. A.; Hoebe, C. J.; Dukers-Muijrers, N. H.

2023-08-02 epidemiology
10.1101/2023.07.27.23293244 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundLong-term symptoms after a SARS-CoV-2 infection (i.e., post-COVID-19 condition or long COVID), constitute a substantial public health problem. Yet, the prevalence remains currently unclear as different case definitions are used, and negatively tested controls are lacking. We aimed to estimate post-COVID-19 condition prevalence using six definitions. MethodsThe Prevalence, Risk factors, and Impact Evaluation (PRIME) post-COVID-19 condition study is a population-based sample of COVID-19 tested adults. End 2021, 61,655 adults were invited to complete an online questionnaire, including 44 symptoms plus a severity score (0-10) per symptom. The prevalence was calculated in both positively and negatively tested adults, stratified by time since their COVID-19 test (3-5, 6-11 or [≥]12 months ago). ResultsIn positives (n=7,405; 75.6%), the prevalence of long-term symptoms was between 26.9% and 64.1% using the six definitions, while in negatives (n=2,392; 24.4%) the prevalence varied between 11.4% and 32.5%. The prevalence of long-term symptoms potentially accountable to COVID-19 ranged from 17.9% to 26.3%. ConclusionThere is a (substantial) variation in prevalence estimates by using different definitions as is current practice, showing limited overlap between definitions, indicating that the essential post-COVID-19 condition criteria are still unclear. Including negatives is important to determine long-term symptoms accountable to COVID-19. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05128695.

Matching journals

The top 13 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.