Pulmonary sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection and factors associated with persistent abnormal lung function at six months after infection: Prospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Information on the long-term pulmonary sequelae following SARS-CoV-2 infection is limited. METHODS: Prospective cohort study of hospitalized and non-hospitalized adult patients age >18 with documented SARS-CoV-2 infection by RT-PCR three months prior to enrolment between June and December 2020. Participants underwent full pulmonary function test (PFT), cardiopulmonary exercise testing at 3 months and 6 months. Primary outcome was mean differences of forced vital capacity (FVC), diffuse capacity of lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO), and oxygen consumption (VO2) at 6 vs. 3 months. Secondary outcomes were respiratory outcomes classified into 5 clinical groups-no lung disease, resolved lung disease, persistent lung disease, PFT abnormalities attributable to pre-existing lung disease or other factors, and mild PFT abnormalities of uncertain clinical significance. RESULTS: Fifty-one, 30 hospitalized and 21 non-hospitalized, participants were included. Median age was 51 years; 20 (39.2%) were female. Mean (±SD) percent predicted values of FVC, DLCO and VO2 at 3 vs 6-month-visits were 96.2 ± 15.6 vs. 97.6 ± 15.5, 73.74 ±18 vs. 78.5 ± 15.5, and 75.5 ± 18.9 vs. 76.1 ± 21.5, respectively. Nineteen (37%) patients had physiologic and/or radiographic evidence of lung disease at 3 months with eight (15.7%) continuing to have persistent disease at 6 months. History of diabetes, hypertension, ICU admission and elevated D-Dimer levels were associated with persistent lung disease at 6 months. INTERPRETATION: Persistent lung disease at 6 months post SARS-CoV-2 infection exists. Changes of lung function between 3- and 6-months are not significant. A longer follow-up is required to determine long-term prognosis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".