COVID19-associated new-onset movement disorders: a follow-up study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neurological symptoms are common manifestation in acute COVID-19. This includes hyper- and hypokinetic movement disorders. Data on their outcome, however, is limited. METHODS: Cases with new-onset COVID-19-associated movement disorders were identified by searching the literature. Authors were contacted for outcome data which were reviewed and analyzed. RESULTS: Movement disorders began 12.6 days on average after the initial onset of COVID-19. 92% of patients required hospital admission (mean duration 23 days). In a fraction of patients (6 of 27; 22%; 4 males/2 females, mean age 66.8 years) the movement disorder (ataxia, myoclonus, tremor, parkinsonism) was still present after a follow-up period of 7.5 ± 3 weeks. Severe COVID-19 in general and development of encephalopathy were risk factors, albeit not strong predictors, for the persistence. CONCLUSIONS: The prognosis of new-onset COVID-19-associated movement disorder appears to be generally good. The majority recovered without residual symptoms within several weeks or months. Permanent cases may be due to unmasking of a previous subclinical movement disorder or due to vascular/demyelinating damage. Given the relatively low response rate of one third only and the heterogeneity of mechanisms firm conclusions on the (long-term) outome cannot, however, be drawn.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".