RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Validity of reported post-acute health outcomes in children with SARS-CoV-2 infection: a systematic review
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.03.18.22272582
DO 10.1101/2022.03.18.22272582
A1 Hirt, Julian
A1 Janiaud, Perrine
A1 Gloy, Viktoria
A1 Schandelmaier, Stefan
A1 Pereira, Tiago V.
A1 Contopoulos-Ioannidis, Despina G.
A1 Goodman, Steven N.
A1 Ioannidis, John P. A.
A1 Munkholm, Klaus
A1 Hemkens, Lars G.
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/03/20/2022.03.18.22272582.abstract
AB Importance There is concern that post-acute SARS-CoV-2 infection health outcomes (“post-COVID syndrome”) in children could be a serious problem but at the same time there is concern about the validity of reported associations between infection and long-term outcomes.Objective To systematically assess the validity of reported post-acute SARS-CoV-2 infection health outcomes in children.Evidence Review A search on PubMed and Web of Science was conducted to identify studies published up to January 22, 2022, that reported on post-acute SARS-CoV-2 infection health outcomes in children (<18 years) with follow-up of ≥2 months since detection of infection or ≥1 month since recovery from acute illness. We assessed the consideration of confounding bias and causality, and the risk of bias.Findings 21 studies including 81,896 children reported up to 97 symptoms with follow-up periods of 2-11.5 months. Fifteen studies had no control group. The reported proportion of children with post-COVID syndrome was between 0% and 66.5% in children with SARS-CoV-2 infection (n=16,986) and 2% to 53.3% in children without SARS-CoV-2 infection (n=64,910). Only 2 studies made a clear causal interpretation of an association of SARS-CoV-2 infection and the main outcome of “post-COVID syndrome” and provided recommendations regarding prevention measures. Two studies mentioned potential limitations in the conclusion of the main text but none of the 21 studies mentioned any limitations in the abstract nor made a clear statement for cautious interpretation. The validity of all 21 studies was seriously limited due to an overall critical risk of bias (critical risk for confounding bias [n=21]; serious or critical risk for selection bias [n=19]; serious risk for misclassification bias [n=3], for bias due to missing data [n=14] and for outcome measurement [n=12]; and critical risk for selective reporting bias [n=16]).Conclusions and Relevance The validity of reported post-acute SARS-CoV-2 infection health outcomes in children is critically limited. None of the studies provided evidence with reasonable certainty on whether SARS-CoV-2 infection has an impact on post-acute health outcomes, let alone to what extent. Children and their families urgently need much more reliable and methodologically robust evidence to address their concerns and improve care.Question How valid are the reported results on health outcomes in children after acute SARS-CoV-2 infection?Findings We identified 21 studies with only 6 using a controlled design. Reported post-acute health-outcomes were numerous and heterogeneous. The reported proportion of children with post-COVID syndrome was up to 66.5% in children with and 53.3% in children without SARS-CoV-2 infection. All studies had seriously limited validity due to critical and serious risk of bias in multiple domains.Meaning The validity of reported post-acute SARS-CoV-2 infection health outcomes in children is critically limited and methodological robust evidence is urgently needed.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical Protocols https://osf.io/pemxr/ Funding StatementTVP is funded by the Chevening Scholarship Programme (Foreign and Commonwealth Office, UK).Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript.