MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3131725277 · doi:10.1101/2021.02.24.21252335

The neurology and neuropsychiatry of COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the early literature reveals frequent CNS manifestations and key emerging narratives

2021· review· en· W3131725277 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan Rogers, Cameron Watson, James Badenoch, Benjamin Cross, Matthew Butler, Jia Song, Danish Hafeez, Hamilton Morrin, Emma Rengasamy, Lucretia Thomas, Silviya Ralovska, Abigail Smakowski, Ritika Dilip Sundaram, Camille K. Hunt, Mao Fong Lim, Daruj Aniwattanapong, Vanshika Singh, Zain Hussain, Stuti Chakraborty, Ella Burchill, Katrin Jansen, Heinz Holling, Dean Walton, Thomas Pollak, Mark Ellul, Ivan Koychev, Tom Solomon, Benedict Michael, Timothy R. Nicholson, Alasdair G Rooney

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLong-Term Effects of COVID-19
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersFaculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn UniversityMedical Research CouncilDementias Platform UKChulalongkorn UniversityPublic Health EnglandUniversity of OxfordNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchNational Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research UnitDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftUK Research and InnovationRoyal College of Physicians of EdinburghWellcome TrustJapan Agency for Medical Research and Development
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisDepression (economics)Cohort studyAnxietyPsycINFODysgeusiaSystematic reviewPsychiatryNeuropsychiatryInternal medicinePediatricsMEDLINEAdverse effect

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Objectives There is accumulating evidence of the neurological and neuropsychiatric features of infection with SARS-CoV-2. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to describe the characteristics of the early literature and estimate point prevalences for neurological and neuropsychiatric manifestations. Methods We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo and CINAHL up to 18 July 2020 for randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, cross-sectional studies and case series. Studies reporting prevalences of neurological or neuropsychiatric symptoms were synthesised into meta-analyses to estimate pooled prevalence. Results 13,292 records were screened by at least two authors to identify 215 included studies, of which there were 37 cohort studies, 15 case-control studies, 80 cross-sectional studies and 83 case series from 30 countries. 147 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The symptoms with the highest prevalence were anosmia (43.1% [35.2—51.3], n =15,975, 63 studies), weakness (40.0% [27.9—53.5], n =221, 3 studies), fatigue (37.8% [31.6—44.4], n =21,101, 67 studies), dysgeusia (37.2% [30.0—45.3], n =13,686, 52 studies), myalgia (25.1% [19.8—31.3], n =66.268, 76 studies), depression (23.0 % [11.8—40.2], n =43,128, 10 studies), headache (20.7% [95% CI 16.1—26.1], n =64,613, 84 studies), anxiety (15.9% [5.6—37.7], n =42,566, 9 studies) and altered mental status (8.2% [4.4—14.8], n =49,326, 19 studies). Heterogeneity for most clinical manifestations was high. Conclusions Neurological and neuropsychiatric symptoms of COVID-19 in the pandemic’s early phase are varied and common. The neurological and psychiatric academic communities should develop systems to facilitate high-quality methodologies, including more rapid examination of the longitudinal course of neuropsychiatric complications of newly emerging diseases and their relationship to neuroimaging and inflammatory biomarkers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.116

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.028
Bibliometrics0.0100.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.322 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations47
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicLong-Term Effects of COVID-19French-language works237,207