MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4322615481 · doi:10.14740/jocmr4855

Symptom Profile of Patients With Post-COVID-19 Conditions and Influencing Factors for Recovery

2023· article· en· W4322615481 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Norihiro Matsuoka, Takuo Mizutani, Koji Kawakami

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLong-Term Effects of COVID-19
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)ZincHydrateSignificant differenceTasteSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Internal medicineDiseaseFood scienceMetallurgyInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The aim of the study was to examine the factors that influence the improvement of post-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) symptoms. Methods: We investigated the biomarkers and post-COVID-19 symptoms status of 120 post-COVID-19 symptomatic outpatients (44 males and 76 females) visiting our hospital. This study was a retrospective analysis, so we analyzed the course of symptoms only for those who could follow the progress of the symptoms for 12 weeks. We analyzed the data including the intake of zinc acetate hydrate. Results: The main symptoms that remained after 12 weeks were, in descending order: taste disorder, olfactory disorder, hair loss, and fatigue. Fatigue was improved in all cases treated with zinc acetate hydrate 8 weeks later, exhibiting a significant difference from the untreated group (P = 0.030). The similar trend was observed even 12 weeks later, although there was no significant difference (P = 0.060). With respect to hair loss, the group treated with zinc acetate hydrate showed significant improvements 4, 8, and 12 weeks later, compared with the untreated group (P = 0.002, P = 0.002, and P = 0.006). Conclusion: Zinc acetate hydrate may improve fatigue and hair loss as symptoms after contracting COVID-19.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.135
GPT teacher head0.521
Teacher spread0.386 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Medicine Research→Same topicLong-Term Effects of COVID-19→French-language works237,207→