MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308053023 · doi:10.1159/000526653

The Infected Lungs and Brain Interface in COVID-19: The Impact on Cognitive Function

2022· review· en· W4308053023 on OpenAlexaff
Larissa Joaquim, Amanda Della Giustina, Richard Simon Machado, Kiuanne Lino Lobo Metzker, Sandra Bonfante, Lucinéia Gainski Danielski, Mariana Pereira de Souza Goldim, Fabrícia Petronilho

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroImmunoModulation · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLong-Term Effects of COVID-19
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeuroinflammationCognitionMedicineSystemic inflammationCoronavirusInflammationCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)ImmunologyNeuroscienceDiseaseBioinformaticsPsychologyPathologyPsychiatryBiologyInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-recovered patients report signs and symptoms and are experiencing neurological, psychiatric, and cognitive problems. However, the exact prevalence and outcome of cognitive sequelae is unclear. Even though the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 has target brain cells through binding to angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor in acute infection, several studies indicate the absence of the virus in the brain of many COVID-19 patients who developed neurological disorders. Thus, the COVID-19 mechanisms for stimulating cognitive dysfunction may include neuroinflammation, which is mediated by a sustained systemic inflammation, a disrupted brain barrier, and severe glial reactiveness, especially within the limbic system. This review explores the interplay of infected lungs and brain in COVID-19 and its impact on the cognitive function.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.344 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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