Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41813046›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2026

Exploring experiences following participation in a concentrated micro-choice-based rehabilitation programme for long covid: a focus group study.

Kiri Lovise Njøten, Liv Heide Magnussen, Anne Haugstvedt, Marte Jürgensen, Gerd Kvale, Bente Frisk

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05234281 (Concentrated Cross-disciplinary Group Intervention for Common Health Complaints), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT05234281 naunknown statusnot on this map

Concentrated Cross-disciplinary Group Intervention for Common Health Complaints (Mixed Anxiety Depression, Diabetes Mellitus Type 2, Low Back Pain, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Post COVID-19 Fatigue)

TypeinterventionalSponsorHelse i HardangerRan2021 to 2024Enrolled1,000ConditionsMixed Anxiety Depression, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Low Back Pain, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary DiseaseArmsInterdisciplincary concentrated group rehabilitation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Kiri Lovise NjøtenDepartment of Health and Functioning, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Bergen, Hordaland, Norway Kiri.Lovise.Njoten@hvl.no.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3531-1071
Liv Heide MagnussenDepartment of Health and Functioning, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Bergen, Hordaland, Norway.
Anne HaugstvedtDepartment of Health and Caring Sciences, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Bergen, Hordaland, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9742-295X
Marte JürgensenDivision of Psychiatry, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2889-4144
Gerd KvaleDepartment of Clinical Psychology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Bente FriskDepartment of Health and Functioning, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Bergen, Hordaland, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7752-4895

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo explore how individuals with long covid experienced various aspects of a micro-choice-based rehabilitation programme and if these experiences could facilitate behaviour change.

designA qualitative study with three focus groups was conducted, in mean 9.8 months after completing the rehabilitation programme. Data were analysed using systematic text condensation.

settingThe study was conducted in a university setting.

participants19 participants (aged 23-55 years, 15 women) were included between Spring 2021 and Autumn 2022.

interventionThe participants in this study had participated in a 3-day concentrated micro-choice-based rehabilitation programme. One of the main features of this intervention was to support participants in shifting their focus from targeting symptoms to choosing alternative actions aimed at improving everyday functioning, referred to as micro-choices.

resultsFive themes were identified: (1) reduction in uncertainty achieved through reassurance and motivation; (2) 'in the same boat': sharing experiences and supporting each other; (3) knowledge about the body's stress responses and micro-choices; (4) shifting between individual practice and close collaboration with the therapists; and (5) sustaining behaviour change is challenging. These themes illustrated how participants' experiences with different aspects of the rehabilitation programme facilitated both the initiation and maintenance of behaviour change. The participants highlighted the importance of acknowledging their challenges, reducing fear, sharing experiences with peers, feeling understood and supported, collaborating with a skilled team, receiving personalised guidance and gaining insights through the exploration and implementation of micro-choices. Participants also highlighted that behaviour change is an ongoing process requiring sustained effort.

conclusionThe findings showed how participants experienced various aspects of a concentrated micro-choice-based rehabilitation programme as supportive of behaviour change. The findings indicate that a concentrated rehabilitation programme may facilitate self-management and improve everyday function in individuals with long covid. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05234281.

Indexed as

COVID-19AdultChoice BehaviorFemaleFocus GroupsHumansMaleMiddle AgedMotivationPost-Acute COVID-19 SyndromeQualitative ResearchSARS-CoV-2Young AdultCOVID-19Public healthQUALITATIVE RESEARCH

Identifiers

PMID41813046
PMCPMC12983977

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.