Hyposmia Is Associated with Reduced Cognitive Function in COVID-19: First Preliminary Results
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hyposmia is frequently reported as an initial symptom in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). OBJECTIVE: As hyposmia accompanies cognitive impairment in several neurological disorders, we aimed to study whether hyposmia represents a clinical biomarker for both neurological involvement and cognitive impairment in mild CO-VID-19. We aimed to study whether olfactory dysfunction (OD) represents a clinical biomarker for both neurological involvement and cognitive impairment in mild COVID-19. METHODS: Formal olfactory testing using the Sniffin'Sticks® Screening test, neuropsychological assessment using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and detailed neurological examination were performed in 7 COVID-19 patients with mild disease course and no history of olfactory or cognitive impairment, and 7 controls matched for age, sex, and education. Controls were initially admitted to a dedicated COVID-19 screening ward but tested negative by real-time PCR. RESULTS: The number of correctly identified odors was significantly lower in COVID-19 than in controls (6 ± 3, vs. 10 ± 1 p = 0.028, r = 0.58). Total MoCA score was significantly lower in COVID-19 patients than in controls (20 ± 5 vs. 26 ± 3, p = 0.042, r = 0.54). Cognitive performance indicated by MoCA was associated with number of correctly identified odors in COVID-19 patients and controls (COVID-19: p = 0.018, 95% CI = 9-19; controls: p = 0.18, r = 0.63, 95% CI = 13-18.5 r = 0.64). DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: OD is associated with cognitive impairment in controls and mild COVID-19. OD may represent a potentially useful clinical biomarker for subtle and even subclinical neurological involvement in severe acute respiratory distress syndrome coronavirus-2 infection.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".