Background and Objectives: Systematic reviews (SRs) are time and resource intensive, requiring approximately 1 year from protocol registration to submission for publication. Our aim was to describe the process, facilitators, and barriers to completing the first 2-week full SR.Study Design and Setting: We systematically reviewed evidence of the impact of increased fluid intake, on urinary tract infection (UTI) recurrence, in individuals at risk for UTIs. The review was conducted by experienced systematic reviewers with complementary skills (two researcher clinicians, an information specialist, and an epidemiologist), using Systematic Review Automation tools, and blocked off time for the duration of the project. The outcomes were time to complete the SR, time to complete individual SR tasks, facilitators and barriers to progress, and peer reviewer feedback on the SR manuscript. Times to completion were analyzed quantitatively (minutes and calendar days); facilitators and barriers were mapped onto the Theoretical Domains Framework; and peer reviewer feedback was analyzed quantitatively and narratively.Results: The SR was completed in 61 person-hours (9 workdays; 12 calendar days); accepted version of the manuscript required 71 person-hours. Individual SR tasks ranged from 16 person-minutes (deduplication of search results) to 461 person-minutes (data extraction). The least time-consuming SR tasks were obtaining full-texts, searches, citation analysis, data synthesis, and deduplication. The most timeconsuming tasks were data extraction, write-up, abstract screening, full-text screening, and risk of bias. Facilitators and barriers mapped onto the following domains: knowledge; skills; memory, attention, and decision process; environmental context and resources; and technology and infrastructure. Two sets of peer reviewer feedback were received on the manuscript: the first included 34 comments requesting changes, 17 changes were made, requiring 173 person-minutes; the second requested 13 changes, and eight were made, requiring 121 person-minutes.Conclusion: A small and experienced systematic reviewer team using Systematic Review Automation tools who have protected time to focus solely on the SR can complete a moderately sized SR in 2 weeks.

ObjectiveTo determine the effect of covid-19 vaccination, given before and after acute infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, or after a diagnosis of long covid, on the rates and symptoms of long covid.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesPubMed, Embase, and Cochrane covid-19 trials, and Europe PubMed Central (Europe PMC) for preprints, from 1 January 2020 to 3 August 2022.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesTrials, cohort studies, and case-control studies reporting on patients with long covid and symptoms of long covid, with vaccination before and after infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, or after a diagnosis of long covid. Risk of bias was assessed with the ROBINS-I tool.Results1645 articles were screened but no randomised controlled trials were found. 16 observational studies from five countries (USA, UK, France, Italy, and the Netherlands) were identified that reported on 614 392 patients. The most common symptoms of long covid that were studied were fatigue, cough, loss of sense of smell, shortness of breath, loss of taste, headache, muscle ache, difficulty sleeping, difficulty concentrating, worry or anxiety, and memory loss or confusion. 12 studies reported data on vaccination before infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and 10 showed a significant reduction in the incidence of long covid: the odds ratio of developing long covid with one dose of vaccine ranged from 0.22 to 1.03; with two doses, odds ratios were 0.25-1; with three doses, 0.16; and with any dose, 0.48-1.01. Five studies reported on vaccination after infection, with odds ratios of 0.38-0.91. The high heterogeneity between studies precluded any meaningful meta-analysis. The studies failed to adjust for potential confounders, such as other protective behaviours and missing data, thus increasing the risk of bias and decreasing the certainty of evidence to low.ConclusionsCurrent studies suggest that covid-19 vaccines might have protective and therapeutic effects on long covid. More robust comparative observational studies and trials are needed, however, to clearly determine the effectiveness of vaccines in preventing and treating long covid.Protocol registrationOpen Science Frameworkhttps://osf.io/e8jdy.

No abstract

No abstract

Background: The impact of COVID-19 vaccination on preventing or treating long COVID is unclear. We aim to assess the impact of COVID vaccinations administered (i) before and (ii) after acute COVID-19, including vaccination after long COVID diagnosis, on the rates or symptoms of long COVID. Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane COVID-19 trials, and Europe PMC for preprints from 1 Jan 2020 to 16 Feb 2022. We included trials, cohort, and case control studies reporting on long COVID cases and symptoms with vaccine administration both before and after COVID-19 diagnosis as well as after long COVID diagnosis. Risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-I. Results: We screened 356 articles and found no trials, but 6 observational studies from 3 countries (USA, UK, France) that reported on 442,601 patients. The most common long COVID symptoms studied include fatigue, cough, loss of smell, shortness of breath, loss of taste, headache, muscle ache, trouble sleeping, difficulty concentrating, worry or anxiety, and memory loss or confusion. Four studies reported data on vaccination before SARS-CoV-2 infection, of which three showed statistically significant reduction in long COVID: the odds ratio of developing long COVID with one dose of vaccine ranged between OR 0.22 to 1.03; with two doses OR 0.51 to 1; and with any dose OR 0.85 to 1.01. Three studies reported on post-infection vaccination with odds ratios between 0.38 to 0.91. The high heterogeneity between studies precluded any meaningful meta-analysis. Studies failed to adjust for potential confounders such as other protective behaviours, and missing data, thus increasing the risk of bias, and decreasing the certainty of evidence to low. Discussion: Current studies suggest that COVID-19 vaccinations may have protective and therapeutic effects on long COVID. However, more robust comparative observational studies and trials are urgently needed to clearly determine effectiveness of vaccines in prevention and treatment of long COVID.