Functional disorders as a common motor manifestation of <scp>COVID</scp>‐19 infection or vaccination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: There have been over 500 million confirmed cases of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), also known as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), across the globe. To date, a broad spectrum of neurological manifestations following acute infections as well as COVID-19 vaccines have been reported. The aim of this study was to describe the spectrum of neurological manifestations seen in the 'COVID-19 clinic' established in a tertiary Movement Disorders clinic. METHODS: In this consecutive case-series study over the period March 2020-January 2022, clinical information regarding demographic data, clinical history and examination findings, investigation results and video recordings of outpatients with motor manifestations associated with COVID-19 infection or vaccination were reviewed. RESULTS: Twenty-one adult patients were reviewed in this ad hoc clinic at Toronto Western Hospital. The majority of the patients were female (76%) and the mean (range) age was 50.7 ± 17.2 (21-80) years. Nine patients (43%) presented with motor manifestations following COVID-19 infection. Twelve patients (57%) developed neurological symptoms following at least one dose of the mRNA or viral vector-based COVID-19 vaccine. The most common manifestation observed was a functional movement disorder (43%). The vaccine group demonstrated a higher number of functional disorders compared to the infection group (58% vs. 22%; p = 0.08). CONCLUSION: Functional motor manifestations can be associated with COVID-19 and are likely to be under-reported. In view of the co-existence of functional symptoms, movement disorders and mental health conditions observed in this study, we would advocate the use of dedicated COVID-19 Neurology clinics with full access to an experienced multidisciplinary team.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".