A quantitative and qualitative study on the neuropsychiatric sequelae of acutely ill COVID-19 inpatients in isolation facilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the neuropsychiatric sequelae of acutely ill patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection who received treatment in hospital isolation wards during the COVID-19 pandemic. Ten COVID-19 patients who received treatment in various hospitals in Chongqing, China; 10 age- and gender-matched psychiatric patients; and 10 healthy control participants residing in the same city were recruited. All participants completed a survey that collected information on demographic data, physical symptoms in the past 14 days and psychological parameters. Face-to-face interviews with COVID-19 patients were also performed using semi-structured questions. Among the COVID-19 patients, 40% had abnormal findings on the chest computed topography scan, 20% had dysosmia, 10% had dysgeusia, and 80% had repeated positivity on COVID-19 reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction testing. COVID-19 and psychiatric patients were significantly more worried about their health than healthy controls (p = 0.019). A greater proportion of COVID-19 patients experienced impulsivity (p = 0.016) and insomnia (p = 0.039) than psychiatric patients and healthy controls. COVID-19 patients reported a higher psychological impact of the outbreak than psychiatric patients and healthy controls, with half of them having clinically significant symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder. COVID-19 and psychiatric patients had higher levels of depression, anxiety and stress than healthy controls. Three themes emerged from the interviews with COVID-19 patients: (i) The emotions experienced by patients after COVID-19 infection (i.e., shock, fear, despair, hope, and boredom); (ii) the external factors that affected patients' mood (i.e., discrimination, medical expenses, care by healthcare workers); and (iii) coping and self-help behavior (i.e., distraction, problem-solving and online support). The future direction in COVID-19 management involves the development of a holistic inpatient service to promote immune and psychological resilience.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".