Disentangling the cognitive, physical, and mental health sequelae of COVID-19
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As COVID-19 cases exceed hundreds of millions globally, many survivors face cognitive challenges and prolonged symptoms. However, important questions about the cognitive effects of COVID-19 remain unresolved. In this cross-sectional online study, 478 adult volunteers who self-reported a positive test for COVID-19 (mean = 30 days since most recent test) perform significantly worse than pre-pandemic norms on cognitive measures of processing speed, reasoning, verbal, and overall performance, but not short-term memory, suggesting domain-specific deficits. Cognitive differences are even observed in participants who did not require hospitalization. Factor analysis of health- and COVID-related questionnaires reveals two clusters of symptoms-one that varies mostly with physical symptoms and illness severity, and one with mental health. Cognitive performance is positively correlated with the global measure encompassing physical symptoms, but not the one that broadly describes mental health, suggesting that the subjective experience of "long COVID" relates to physical symptoms and cognitive deficits, especially executive dysfunction.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it