Back

The Evolution of Long COVID Research, 2020 to 2025: A Bibliometric Analysis with Implications for Clinical Practice and Policy

Daodu, L. P.; Ajanaku, N.; Ojeikere, K. I.; Ozokolie, G. E.; Okouzi, M.; Ogunbiyi, O. J.; Onah, C. M.; Olotu, M.; Chibuoke, H. C.; Erameh, M.

2025-09-24 public and global health
10.1101/2025.09.23.25336485 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundSince 2020, recognition of long COVID (post-acute sequelae of COVID-19) has prompted rapid multidisciplinary research across medicine, public health, psychology, and the social sciences. The literature is extensive and heterogeneous, making it challenging to synthesise current knowledge, identify evidence gaps, and inform research priorities. MethodsWe performed a bibliometric review of long COVID publications indexed in Scopus from January 2020 to March 2025. Records were analysed using VOSviewer and Biblioshiny to assess publication trends, country and institutional contributions, authorship networks, citation impact, and thematic clusters. ResultsPublications on long COVID grew at an annual rate of 19.81%, peaking in 2024, reflecting intensified global attention. The United States, China, and the United Kingdom were the largest contributors. Thematic mapping revealed three dominant clusters: clinical research on manifestations and diagnostics; psychological research on mental health and cognitive sequelae; and social and rehabilitation research addressing disability, return to work, and service delivery. Prominent institutions and key authors played a central role in knowledge production and collaboration networks. Notable gaps included limited studies on paediatric long COVID, scarce long-term outcome data from diverse populations and settings, and few rigorous evaluations of interventions and service models. ConclusionsThe long COVID research landscape from 2020 to 2025 is dynamic and increasingly collaborative, yet exhibits geographic and topical imbalances. To advance understanding and improve patient outcomes, stakeholders should support inclusive international collaborations, prioritise funding for underexplored populations and intervention trials, and accelerate translation of findings into clinical guidelines and integrated care models. Continued bibliometric monitoring will help target research investments and policy responses.

Matching journals

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

1
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 2%
9.2%
2
JAMA Pediatrics
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.5%
3
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 31%
4.9%
4
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
4.2%
5
PLOS Global Public Health
293 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.0%
6
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.0%
7
eClinicalMedicine
55 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
8
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.6%
9
Archives of Disease in Childhood
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.5%
10
Psychiatry Research
35 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.1%
11
BMJ Paediatrics Open
21 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.9%
12
International Journal of Public Health
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.9%
13
Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
32 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
50% of probability mass above
14
BMC Public Health
147 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
15
Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
16
Psychological Medicine
74 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
1.7%
17
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.7%
18
Frontiers in Psychiatry
83 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
19
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
20
The Lancet Public Health
20 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
21
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
28 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.5%
22
Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.2%
23
BMJ Public Health
18 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.2%
24
Journal of Public Health
23 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.2%
25
The Lancet Global Health
24 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.2%
26
BMC Psychiatry
22 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.0%
27
BMJ Global Health
98 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
28
The British Journal of Psychiatry
21 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.9%
29
Palliative Medicine
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
30
Social Science & Medicine
15 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.9%