Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 339

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 22 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Dyspnoea, lung function and CT findings 3 months after hospital admission for COVID-19

Open access
Lerum, Tøri Vigeland, Aaløkken, Trond Mogens, Brønstad, Eivind, Aarli, Bernt, Ikdahl, Eirik, Lund, Kristine Marie Aarberg, Durheim, Michael T., Rodriguez, Jezabel Rivero, Meltzer, Carin, Tonby, Kristian, Stavem, Knut, Skjønsberg, Ole Henning, Ashraf, Haseem, Einvik, Gunnar·2021·European Respiratory Journal

Abstract

The long-term pulmonary outcomes of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are unknown. We aimed to describe self-reported dyspnoea, quality of life, pulmonary function and chest computed tomography (CT) findings 3 months following hospital admission for COVID-19. We hypothesised outcomes to be inferior for patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs), compared with non-ICU patients. Discharged COVID-19 patients from six Norwegian hospitals were enrolled consecutively in a prospective cohort study. The current report describes the first 103 participants, including 15 ICU patients. The modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnoea scale, the EuroQol Group's questionnaire, spirometry, diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO), 6-min walk test, pulse oximetry and low-dose CT scan were performed 3 months after discharge. mMRC score was >0 in 54% and >1 in 19% of the participants. The median (25th–75th percentile) forced vital capacity and forced expiratory volume in 1 s were 94% (76–121%) and 92% (84–106%) of predicted, respectively.DLCO was below the lower limit of normal in 24% of participants. Ground-glass opacities (GGO) with >10% distribution in at least one of four pulmonary zones were present in 25% of participants, while 19% had parenchymal bands on chest CT. ICU survivors had similar dyspnoea scores and pulmonary function as non-ICU patients, but higher prevalence of GGO (adjusted OR 4.2, 95% CI 1.1–15.6) and lower performance in usual activities. 3 months after admission for COVID-19, one-fourth of the participants had chest CT opacities and reduced diffusing capacity. Admission to ICU was associated with pathological CT findings. This was not reflected in increased dyspnoea or impaired lung function.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1183/13993003.03448-2020

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 22 references

Cited by

See all 339

Metadata

Authors
Lerum, T. V., Aaløkken, T. M., Brønstad, E., Aarli, B., Ikdahl, E., Lund, K. M. A., Durheim, M. T., Rodriguez, J. R., Meltzer, C., Tonby, K., Stavem, K., Skjønsberg, O. H., Ashraf, H., & Einvik, G.
Venue
European Respiratory Journal
Published
2020-12-10
Volume
57
Issue
4
Pages
2003448
ISSN
  • 0903-1936 (ISSN-L)
  • 1399-3003
OpenAlex
W3112559917
Cited by
339
References
22
FWCI
24.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Dyspnoea, lung function and CT findings 3 months after hospital admission for COVID-19. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1183/13993003.03448-2020
The paper
Lerum, T. V., Aaløkken, T. M., Brønstad, E., Aarli, B., Ikdahl, E., Lund, K. M. A., Durheim, M. T., Rodriguez, J. R., Meltzer, C., Tonby, K., Stavem, K., Skjønsberg, O. H., Ashraf, H., & Einvik, G. (2021). Dyspnoea, lung function and CT findings 3 months after hospital admission for COVID-19. European Respiratory Journal. https://doi.org/10.1183/13993003.03448-2020

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.