ReviewHealth science reports2026
Impact of COVID-19 on Subsequent Lung Function in Childhood: A Systematized Review.
Review in Health science reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: The SARS-CoV-2 infection can lead to transiently altered lung function in adults, but data is less clear in children. We aimed to summarize the available evidence about respiratory outcomes after COVID-19 in childhood. Methods: We conducted a literature search on post-COVID-19 lung function tests (LFT) on the Medline and Cochrane databases, including studies published between 2019 and 2025. Results: Three hundred forty-seven publications were identified, and 20 were selected. Results are presented in two sections, based on the duration of follow-up. Most studies included spirometry, whereas many of them presented data from diffusing lung capacity for carbon monoxide, multiple breath nitrogen washout, fractional exhaled nitric oxide, impulse oscillometry, 6-minute walking test, and interrupter resistance. Five papers described no association between COVID-19 and respiratory outcomes, nor a link between the persistence of symptoms and the outcomes. Other authors reported a mild obstructive pattern which showed reversibility post bronchodilators, or a restrictive pattern, particularly when long-COVID was evident. Some papers showed that pulmonary function may be influenced by the initial severity of the SARS-CoV-2 infection. Conclusion: Some studies reported no clear association between lung function impairment and previous history of COVID-19. Other authors reported mild, transient consequences. A small number of papers concluded that severe infection, which is relatively rare in children, might affect pulmonary function. The main limitation of this review was the high heterogeneity of the included studies, especially regarding the COVID-19 severity, the age groups, the LFT details, and the duration of follow-up.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
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.