Abstract
People with Long COVID, myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), and other complex chronic disorders consistently report having difficulty obtaining effective and compassionate medical care and being disbelieved, judged, gaslighted, and even dismissed by healthcare professionals. We believe that these adversarial interactions and language are more likely to arise when healthcare professionals are confronting complex chronic illnesses without proper training, diagnostic biomarkers, or FDA-approved therapies. These problematic conversations between practitioners and patients often involve specific words and phrases—termed the “never-words”—can leave patients in significant emotional distress and negatively impact the clinician–patient relationship and recovery. Seeking to prevent these destructive interactions, we review key literature on best practices for difficult clinical conversations and discuss the application of these practices for people with Long COVID, ME/CFS, dysautonomia, and other complex chronic disorders. We provide recommendations for alternative, preferred phrasing to the never-words, which can enhance therapeutic relationship and chronic illness patient care via compassionate, encouraging, and non-judgmental language.
1. Introduction
Clinical care and communication surrounding complex chronic disorders, such as Long COVID, myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), dysautonomia, and other disorders involving chronic fatigue and chronic pain has been a challenging task, influenced by a lack of clinical training, controversy, internalized biases, and ableism. Although there is strong evidence of abnormal pathophysiology underlying these conditions [], biopsychosocial explanation and psychogenic etiologies continue to influence how medical professionals relate to and communicate with patients affected by these disorders: paternalistic relationship and false attribution of physical disorders to disturbances of the mind and psyche are among some of the major barriers to effective therapeutic relationship and treatment of patients with these disorders [,].
Both Long COVID and ME/CFS are complex, with Long COVID being a relatively new diagnostic entity and ME/CFS, despite its longer history, still not taught in medical training, making both disorders vulnerable to stigmatization and trivialization [,,]. Both disorders have been characterized as complex, multisystemic, and extensively psychologized, with patients encountering substandard medical care, disbelief, and stigma []. This highlights a structural barrier that is unique to ME/CFS, Long COVID, and other complex chronic illnesses that remain under-investigated: limited research funding and a lack of education and medical training are major contributors to these conditions being labeled as “invisible illnesses” []. The multisystemic nature and complexity of these conditions may lead to patients and their healthcare professionals being squarely at odds with their perspectives on these conditions; healthcare professionals assert one version of reality (“you don’t look sick”; “your tests are normal”), and patients are frustrated with their experience (profound exhaustion and inability to engage in physical and cognitive tasks) being disbelieved and denied the appropriate medical care, categorizing these interactions as “gaslighting” []. We believe that these adversarial relationships and language are more likely to arise when healthcare professionals are confronting complex chronic illnesses without proper training, diagnostic biomarkers, or FDA-approved therapies. The problematic conversations that transpire between clinicians and patients often involve specific words and phrases—termed the “never-words []”—that can leave patients feeling upset, angry, fearful, confused, and demoralized. Situations where patients are blamed for their own illness (e.g., “you feel sick because you are out of shape”) or told to think positively (e.g., “you need to stop thinking about your symptoms so much”) when they have significant post-acute infectious cardiovascular, pulmonary, neurologic, and immunologic complications, or when these arise in the context of systemic disease, create significant distress and distrust for patients and undermine therapeutic relationships, disease management, and chances for improvement or recovery. Seeking to prevent these destructive clinical interactions, we will review key literature on best practices for difficult clinical conversations and then discuss the application of these practices for people with Long COVID, ME/CFS, dysautonomia, and other complex, chronic, and disabling disorders. We will provide recommendations for alternative, preferred phrasing to the never-words, which can enhance therapeutic relationship and chronic illness patient care via compassionate, encouraging, and non-judgmental language.
2. What Are Long COVID, ME/CFS and Dysautonomia
Long COVID, ME/CFS, and dysautonomia are complex chronic conditions that often involve challenging clinical conversations and interactions between patients and healthcare professionals. Understanding these disorders is key to understanding the challenges that can arise in these dialogs.
According to the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine definition, Long COVID is defined as “an infection-associated chronic condition that occurs after SARS-CoV-2 infection and is present for at least 3 months as a continuous, relapsing and remitting, or progressive disease state that affects one or more organ systems []”. It can follow asymptomatic, mild, or severe SARS-CoV-2 infection []. The condition may range from mild to severe, with patient complaints such as fatigue, exercise intolerance, post-exertional malaise, cognitive impairment (often referred to as “brain fog”), diffuse chronic pain, sleep disruption, autonomic dysfunction, including POTS, migraines, gastrointestinal symptoms, and many others. The onset of symptoms may be continuous from the time of infection or delayed in onset by weeks or months following an apparent full recovery from the acute phase of infection []. Disability related to Long COVID may result in profound functional impairments in self-care, as well as family, social, school, and occupational roles. Fifty percent of patients with Long COVID qualify for the diagnosis of ME/CFS [], which similarly results in many of the same themes, biases, and controversies historically characterizing ME/CFS.
Unlike Long COVID, ME/CFS has existed for centuries and has been rife with controversy, politicization, and patient mistreatment. In a report published by the National Academy of Medicine (previously the Institute of Medicine) in 2015, the diagnostic criteria for ME/CFS in adults and children have been defined. Three required symptoms and at least one of two additional symptoms were required to be present for the diagnosis of ME/CFS, including a substantial reduction or impairment in the ability to engage in pre-illness levels of activity (occupational, educational, social, or personal life) lasting for more than 6 months accompanied by profound fatigue, which is not alleviated by rest. Post-exertional malaise (PEM) and unrefreshed sleep must be present [,]. Either cognitive impairment or orthostatic intolerance are also required for the diagnosis [].
Dysautonomia is an umbrella term that refers to any disturbance or dysfunction of the autonomic nervous system and is a major pathophysiologic mechanism of Long COVID and ME/CFS. Autonomic disorders, such as postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), neurocardiogenic syncope, and orthostatic hypotension, may follow SARS-CoV-2 and other infections and are common comorbidities of ME/CFS, autoimmune and inflammatory conditions, and hypermobility spectrum disorders [,,]. Other complex chronic disorders that have been historically poorly understood or neglected by the medical community include fibromyalgia, chronic pain syndromes, undifferentiated connective tissue disorders, mast cell activation syndrome, hypermobility spectrum disorders, autoimmune disorders that do not fit into the currently accepted diagnostic labels (Sjogren’s syndrome, antiphospholipid syndrome and others), and genetic conditions, including mitochondrial disorders, that to date, have not been defined.
Healthcare professionals are often unfamiliar with the recognition, diagnosis, and treatment of these disorders [,,,,]. Funding has recently been provided for Long COVID healthcare professional education to increase awareness and training among physicians and allied health practitioners [].
3. Review: Healthcare Communication Skills for Serious Illness
Effective communication between healthcare professionals and patients has long been recognized as essential to providing quality healthcare—the quality of the patient–clinician relationship is strongly predictive of positive patient care outcomes [,,]. However, it can be challenging to keep this front and center in the busy day-to-day healthcare setting, especially when providing care for patients with complex chronic disorders. Patients facing difficult medical situations, such as life-altering chronic medical conditions, feel especially scared, vulnerable, and out of control, which adds a level of intensity and emotional charge to these interactions. In these emotionally charged situations, practitioners may feel deskilled and revert to more authoritative language and styles of communication, which can then leave patients feeling discounted and unheard, evoking fear and distrust. The result is that communication breaks down, creating barriers to patient care. Fortunately, the literature on communicating during cancer care, serious illness, and end-of-life care offers guidance that can be extended to inform practitioner-patient communications in other serious, complex illnesses. Unfortunately, there is little training or guidance on how to adapt these communication skills to communication about chronic, disabling, and life-altering chronic medical conditions such as neurologic and autoimmune conditions.
There are several well-validated models for effective practitioner–patient communication conversations involving serious illness. The Critical Care Communication (C3) project [] applies the widely used VitalTalk skills package [,], an extensively researched program [] with four core skills (“Ask-Tell-Ask”, recognize/respond to feelings, ask permission to move the conversation forward, and express curiosity “tell me more”) []. C3 focuses on giving bad news, achieving shared treatment goals, and exploring the limitations of life-sustaining care. CLEAR conversations (Connect, Listen, Empathize, Align, Respect) [] is embodied in an app to facilitate the transfer of bundled simulation communication training (role play simulations with actors) and structured feedback to real-world Intensive Care Unit family meetings—the app was created to help practitioners apply skills in this high-stress environment. The REDE model (Relationship, Establishment, Development, Engagement) [] is more broadly focused on general healthcare practice, not just serious medical illness, using guided practice and coaching for communication across the REDE stages. Finally, the SICG (Serious Illness Conversation Guide) [,] focuses on end-of-life conversations that probe patients’ understanding, information preferences, goals, fears/worries, and important functioning/abilities in addition to other key aspects related to end-of-life planning with oncology patients.
Common to these communication training programs is (a) relationship building (through questions, listening, conveying empathy), (b) sharing information briefly first, with a headline, (c) questions to gather the patient’s perspective and values, and (d) collaboration for care planning. Importantly, most of these programs are adapted to reflect the concerns and issues unique to a particular clinical focus, such as Intensive Care (C3 and CLEAR), end-of-life and palliative conversations, as well as oncology (SICG). This makes sense because we communicate about specific content, i.e., “if you become sicker, how much are you willing to go through for the possibility of gaining more time []?” or surgeons being trained to present stories to highlight the best- and worst-case surgery outcome scenarios []. It is clear from the literature that incorporating unique aspects of specialized healthcare practice can assist in applying effective communications skills to these specific healthcare contexts.
4. Structural Barriers to Effective Communication with Complex Chronic Conditions
Lee and colleagues [] highlighted that the treatment of serious illness can be stressful for both the practitioner and the patient. Specifically, they noted that the emotionally charged nature of these conversations might cause practitioners to rely on phrases and words that are poorly matched to the patients’ circumstances at a time when patients are feeling especially vulnerable, stressed, and listening closely to every word. They observed that there also are structural barriers that can derail effective communication beginning with the power imbalance between practitioner and patient. Medical practitioners have extensive knowledge and expertise, and yet while patients are experts on their own lives and values, they enter the relationship feeling vulnerable—due to illness—which can make it harder for them to articulate and organize their thoughts, especially in a time-limited interaction. These interactions also occur in a healthcare context where clinician-patient interaction time is limited, and within hospitals, where it can be unclear who in the team should take the lead to ensure that essential conversations occur with a patient. Adding to this list, we note that twenty to fifty percent of a significant subset of primary care patients report experiences of abuse in childhood [,] which can make them mistrustful of healthcare professionals in adulthood, including within healthcare settings []. Skills in relationship building, exploring concerns, and collaborating on care provide a good start to overcoming these challenges.
It is because of this need to adapt communications to the unique issues with serious illness that Lee and colleagues identified the importance of never-words. Based on this model, and, consistent with the literature reviewed earlier, we propose that the never-words for patients need to be matched to the unique experience of patients with ME/CFS, Long COVID and/or other chronic disabling conditions. While serious illness of all types evokes fear and powerlessness, these emotions will be amplified with complex chronic disorders that are broadly defined, poorly understood mechanistically, and lack clinically available diagnostic biomarkers and FDA-approved therapies.
Finally, even when clinicians and patients are in agreement about a chronic complex condition, because of the complexity and chronicity of these illnesses, it is easy for healthcare professionals to feel inadequate and ineffective in their professional capacity due to a lack of FDA-approved therapies for patients with Long COVID, ME/CFS, and other complex chronic disorders. These feelings can result in clinicians offering pat phrases or simply telling the patient their conditions are not treatable. Those addressing these communication barriers also have identified that humility, that is, specifically acknowledging what you do not know, builds trust [,], and recent research on science communication confirms this, as well [].
As a result, we are extending the important work of Lee et al. [] by presenting never-words for healthcare professionals to avoid using in communications with patients who have Long COVID, ME/CFS, dysautonomia, and other complex chronic disorders, explaining their likely impact, and suggesting alternatives. The first author has several decades of experience as a clinician with patient engagement, teaching patients how to communicate about invisible illnesses, and, more recently, helping people with Long COVID to communicate and advocate with healthcare professionals and employers. The second author has extensive experience as a clinician specializing in complex chronic disorders, including Long COVID, dysautonomia, and ME/CFS. Given our perspective as healthcare professionals, it is important to note that this affects how we view this subject matter, which could lead to bias about never-words. For this reason, we enlisted feedback from a patient advocate related to the never-words and have taken their feedback into consideration.
In Table 1, we identify the never-words, discuss their impact, and suggest alternate phrasing, which can enhance therapeutic relationship and patient care with compassionate, encouraging and non-judgmental language.
Table 1.
Never-words, their impact, and suggested alternatives.
We chose to include these particular situations to ensure we captured the breadth of the types of negative interactions reported by patients [,,,]. It also provided us with an opportunity to educate healthcare professionals about the range of impacts these statements can have. Finally, we note that some of never-words highlight the role that gender bias can play in these challenging dialogs [,,], which is not surprising given that both Long COVID and ME/CFS are more prevalent in women [,,].
5. Conclusions
Communicating with patients about complex, chronic, and disabling illnesses can be an uncomfortable, nuanced, or highly emotional interaction that few healthcare professionals have been taught to engage in throughout their medical training. Clinicians may be apprehensive while approaching the diagnostic and therapeutic management of these complex chronic illnesses without proper training, diagnostic biomarkers, or FDA-approved therapies. Patients are likely to enter these relationships having already encountered multiple obstacles to obtaining effective and compassionate medical care, including dismissal, denial, misdiagnosis with psychiatric disorders, personalized biases, and medical neglect []. In addition, patients with Long COVID, ME/CFS, and other chronic disorders have experienced significant losses because of these disorders, and these losses have a negative impact on them and on their families. For these reasons, relationship-building skills, such as asking questions about their experiences prior to seeking care with you and conveying empathy, as well as avoiding never-words, will all be important to developing a strong therapeutic relationship.
While effective healthcare professional-patient communication should follow well-established structures and processes for communicating about serious illness, it should also avoid never-words that have special meaning within this unique healthcare situation—these never-words may be detrimental to effective communication and serve as significant barriers to effective clinical care and therapeutic relationships.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, N.J.S. and S.B.; writing—original draft preparation, N.J.S. and S.B.; writing—review and editing, N.J.S. and S.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement
Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement
Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement
No data was used in this paper.
Acknowledgments
We thank Amanda Miller from the Patient Advisory Board of Dysautonomia International for her patient engagement and critical review and input on the never-words in Table 1.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
References
- Komaroff, A.L.; Lipkin, W.I. ME/CFS and Long COVID Share Similar Symptoms and Biological Abnormalities: Road Map to the Literature. Front. Med. 2023, 10, 1187163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Institute of Medicine. Beyond Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: Redefining an Illness; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2015; ISBN 978-0-309-31689-7. [Google Scholar]
- National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. A Long COVID Definition: A Chronic, Systemic Disease State with Profound Consequences; Fineberg, H.V., Brown, L., Worku, T., Goldowitz, I., Eds.; The National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2024; ISBN 978-0-309-71908-7. [Google Scholar]
- Wall, D. The Importance of Listening in Treating Invisible Illness and Long-Haul COVID-19. AMA J. Ethics 2021, 23, 590–595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Au, L.; Capotescu, C.; Eyal, G.; Finestone, G. Long COVID and Medical Gaslighting: Dismissal, Delayed Diagnosis, and Deferred Treatment. SSM Qual. Res. Health 2022, 2, 100167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee Adawi Awdish, R.; Grafton, G.; Berry, L.L. Never-Words: What Not to Say to Patients With Serious Illness. Mayo Clin. Proc. 2024, 99, 1553–1557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Dehlia, A.; Guthridge, M.A. The Persistence of Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS) after SARS-CoV-2 Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J. Infect. 2024, 89, 106297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jason, L.A.; Dorri, J.A. ME/CFS and Post-Exertional Malaise among Patients with Long COVID. Neurol. Int. 2023, 15, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Blitshteyn, S.; Whiteson, J.H.; Abramoff, B.; Azola, A.; Bartels, M.N.; Bhavaraju-Sanka, R.; Chung, T.; Fleming, T.K.; Henning, E.; Miglis, M.G.; et al. Multi-Disciplinary Collaborative Consensus Guidance Statement on the Assessment and Treatment of Autonomic Dysfunction in Patients with Post-Acute Sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 Infection (PASC). PMR 2022, 14, 1270–1291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brooks, R.S.; Grady, J.; Lowder, T.W.; Blitshteyn, S. Prevalence of Gastrointestinal, Cardiovascular, Autonomic and Allergic Manifestations in Hospitalized Patients with Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome: A Case-Control Study. Rheumatology 2021, 60, 4272–4280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jason, L.A.; McGarrigle, W.J.; Vermeulen, R.C.W. The Head-Up Tilt Table Test as a Measure of Autonomic Functioning among Patients with Myalgic Encephalomyelitis/Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. J. Pers. Med. 2024, 14, 238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peterson, J. CDC Provides Supplemental Award to CMSS to Improve Provider Education and Engagement to Care for People with Long COVID. CMSS: Chicago, IL, USA; Washington, DC, USA, 2024; Available online: https://cmss.org/news/cdc-provides-supplemental-award-to-cmss-to-improve-provider-education-and-engagement-to-care-for-people-with-long-covid/ (accessed on 10 February 2025).
- Garvey, G. Do’s and Don’ts for Effective Patient-Physician Communication. Available online: https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/physician-patient-relationship/do-s-and-don-ts-effective-patient-physician (accessed on 13 November 2024).
- Ha, J.F.; Longnecker, N. Doctor-Patient Communication: A Review. Ochsner J. 2010, 10, 38. [Google Scholar]
- Kwame, A.; Petrucka, P.M. A Literature-Based Study of Patient-Centered Care and Communication in Nurse-Patient Interactions: Barriers, Facilitators, and the Way Forward. BMC Nurs. 2021, 20, 158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arnold, R.M.; Back, A.L.; Barnato, A.E.; Prendergast, T.J.; Emlet, L.L.; Karpov, I.; White, P.H.; Nelson, J.E. The Critical Care Communication Project: Improving Fellows’ Communication Skills. J. Crit. Care 2015, 30, 250–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arnold, R.M.; Back, A.L.; Carey, E.C.; Tulsky, J.A.; Wood, G.J.; Yang, H.B. Navigating Communication with Seriously Ill Patients: Balancing Honesty with Empathy and Hope, 2nd ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2024; ISBN 978-1-108-92585-3. [Google Scholar]
- VitalTalk. Available online: https://www.vitaltalk.org/ (accessed on 1 December 2024).
- Dana Farberr Cancer Institute. Literature, Evidence and Research. Available online: https://www.vitaltalk.org/evidence/ (accessed on 29 November 2024).
- Awdish, R.L.; Buick, D.; Kokas, M.; Berlin, H.; Jackman, C.; Williamson, C.; Mendez, M.P.; Chasteen, K. A Communications Bundle to Improve Satisfaction for Critically Ill Patients and Their Families: A Prospective, Cohort Pilot Study. J. Pain Symptom Manag. 2017, 53, 644–649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
- Windover, A.K.; Boissy, A.; Rice, T.W.; Gilligan, T.; Velez, V.J.; Merlino, J. The REDE Model of Healthcare Communication: Optimizing Relationship as a Therapeutic Agent. J. Patient Exp. 2014, 1, 8–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bernacki, R.; Hutchings, M.; Vick, J.; Smith, G.; Paladino, J.; Lipsitz, S.; Gawande, A.A.; Block, S.D. Development of the Serious Illness Care Program: A Randomised Controlled Trial of a Palliative Care Communication Intervention. BMJ Open 2015, 5, e009032. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Paladino, J.; Bernacki, R.; Neville, B.A.; Kavanagh, J.; Miranda, S.P.; Palmor, M.; Lakin, J.; Desai, M.; Lamas, D.; Sanders, J.J.; et al. Evaluating an Intervention to Improve Communication Between Oncology Clinicians and Patients with Life-Limiting Cancer: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial of the Serious Illness Care Program. JAMA Oncol. 2019, 5, 801–809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Weill, S.R.; Layden, A.J.; Nabozny, M.J.; Leahy, J.; Claxton, R.; Zelenski, A.B.; Zimmermann, C.; Childers, J.; Arnold, R.; Hall, D.E. Applying VitalTalkTM Techniques to Best Case/Worst Case Training to Increase Scalability and Improve Surgeon Confidence in Shared Decision-Making. J. Surg. Educ. 2022, 79, 983–992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Springer, K.W.; Sheridan, J.; Kuo, D.; Carnes, M. The Long-Term Health Outcomes of Childhood Abuse. J. Gen. Intern. Med. 2003, 18, 864–870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Walker, E.A.; Gelfand, A.; Katon, W.J.; Koss, M.P.; Von Korff, M.; Bernstein, D.; Russo, J. Adult Health Status of Women with Histories of Childhood Abuse and Neglect. Am. J. Med. 1999, 107, 332–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. SAMHSA’s Concept of Trauma and Guidance for a Trauma-Informed Approach; Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration: Rockville, MD, USA, 2014.
- Stone, J.R. Cultivating Humility and Diagnostic Openness in Clinical Judgment. AMA J. Ethics 2017, 19, 970–977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koetke, J.; Schumann, K.; Bowes, S.M.; Vaupotič, N. The Effect of Seeing Scientists as Intellectually Humble on Trust in Scientists and Their Research. Nat. Hum. Behav. 2024, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pietrzak-Franger, M. Rudolphina—Research Magazine of the University of Vienna. 2024. Available online: https://rudolphina.univie.ac.at/en/long-covid-and-me-cfs-when-the-doctor-doesnt-believe-you (accessed on 10 February 2025).
- Pilkington, K.; Ridge, D.T.; Igwesi-Chidobe, C.N.; Chew-Graham, C.A.; Little, P.; Babatunde, O.; Corp, N.; McDermott, C.; Cheshire, A. A Relational Analysis of an Invisible Illness: A Meta-Ethnography of People with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome/Myalgic Encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) and Their Support Needs. Soc. Sci. Med. 2020, 265, 113369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Saul, H. People with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Want to Be Taken Seriously and to Receive Personalised, Empathetic Care. Available online: https://evidence.nihr.ac.uk/alert/cfs-me-people-want-personalised-empathetic-care/ (accessed on 13 November 2024).
- Lowy, I. Long COVID, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and Women: The Shadow of Hysteria. Available online: https://somatosphere.com/2021/long-covid.html/ (accessed on 27 January 2025).
- Shah, D.P.; Thaweethai, T.; Karlson, E.W.; Bonilla, H.; Horne, B.D.; Mullington, J.M.; Wisnivesky, J.P.; Hornig, M.; Shinnick, D.J.; Klein, J.D.; et al. Sex Differences in Long COVID. JAMA Netw. Open 2025, 8, e2455430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).