GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
  • 1
    In: BMJ Open, BMJ, Vol. 12, No. 7 ( 2022-07), p. e062439-
    Abstract: A substantial proportion of individuals infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), report persisting symptoms weeks and months following acute infection. Estimates on prevalence vary due to differences in study designs, populations, heterogeneity of symptoms and the way symptoms are measured. Common symptoms include fatigue, cognitive impairment and dyspnoea. However, knowledge regarding the nature and risk factors for developing persisting symptoms is still limited. Hence, in this study, we aim to determine the prevalence, severity, risk factors and impact on quality of life of persisting symptoms in the first year following acute SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods and analysis The LongCOVID-study is both a prospective and retrospective cohort study being conducted in the Netherlands, with a one year follow-up. Participants aged 5 years and above, with self-reported positive or negative tests for SARS-CoV-2 will be included in the study. The primary outcome is the prevalence and severity of persistent symptoms in participants that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 compared with controls. Symptom severity will be assessed for fatigue (Checklist Individual Strength (CIS subscale fatigue severity)), pain (Rand-36/SF-36 subscale bodily pain), dyspnoea (Medical Research Council (mMRC)) and cognitive impairment (Cognitive Failure Questionnaire (CFQ)). Secondary outcomes include effect of vaccination prior to infection on persistent symptoms, loss of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and risk factors for persisting symptoms following infection with SARS-CoV-2. Ethics and dissemination The Utrecht Medical Ethics Committee (METC) declared in February 2021 that the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act (WMO) does not apply to this study (METC protocol number 21-124/C). Informed consent is required prior to participation in the study. Results of this study will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2044-6055 , 2044-6055
    Language: English
    Publisher: BMJ
    Publication Date: 2022
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2599832-8
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    In: Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry, BMJ
    Abstract: Chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) is a disabling long-term condition of unknown cause. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) published a guideline in 2021 that highlighted the seriousness of the condition, but also recommended that graded exercise therapy (GET) should not be used and cognitive–behavioural therapy should only be used to manage symptoms and reduce distress, not to aid recovery. This U-turn in recommendations from the previous 2007 guideline is controversial. We suggest that the controversy stems from anomalies in both processing and interpretation of the evidence by the NICE committee. The committee: (1) created a new definition of CFS/ME, which ‘downgraded’ the certainty of trial evidence; (2) omitted data from standard trial end points used to assess efficacy; (3) discounted trial data when assessing treatment harm in favour of lower quality surveys and qualitative studies; (4) minimised the importance of fatigue as an outcome; (5) did not use accepted practices to synthesise trial evidence adequately using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations trial evidence); (6) interpreted GET as mandating fixed increments of change when trials defined it as collaborative, negotiated and symptom dependent; (7) deviated from NICE recommendations of rehabilitation for related conditions, such as chronic primary pain and (8) recommended an energy management approach in the absence of supportive research evidence. We conclude that the dissonance between this and the previous guideline was the result of deviating from usual scientific standards of the NICE process. The consequences of this are that patients may be denied helpful treatments and therefore risk persistent ill health and disability.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0022-3050 , 1468-330X
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: BMJ
    Publication Date: 2023
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1480429-3
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...