Alzheimer's early detection in post-acute COVID-19 syndrome: a systematic review and expert consensus on preclinical assessments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The risk of developing Alzheimer's disease (AD) in older adults increasingly is being discussed in the literature on Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome (PACS). Remote digital Assessments for Preclinical AD (RAPAs) are becoming more important in screening for early AD, and should always be available for PACS patients, especially for patients at risk of AD. This systematic review examines the potential for using RAPA to identify impairments in PACS patients, scrutinizes the supporting evidence, and describes the recommendations of experts regarding their use. Methods: We conducted a thorough search using the PubMed and Embase databases. Systematic reviews (with or without meta-analysis), narrative reviews, and observational studies that assessed patients with PACS on specific RAPAs were included. The RAPAs that were identified looked for impairments in olfactory, eye-tracking, graphical, speech and language, central auditory, or spatial navigation abilities. The recommendations' final grades were determined by evaluating the strength of the evidence and by having a consensus discussion about the results of the Delphi rounds among an international Delphi consensus panel called IMPACT, sponsored by the French National Research Agency. The consensus panel included 11 international experts from France, Switzerland, and Canada. Results: Based on the available evidence, olfaction is the most long-lasting impairment found in PACS patients. However, while olfaction is the most prevalent impairment, expert consensus statements recommend that AD olfactory screening should not be used on patients with a history of PACS at this point in time. Experts recommend that olfactory screenings can only be recommended once those under study have reported full recovery. This is particularly important for the deployment of the olfactory identification subdimension. The expert assessment that more long-term studies are needed after a period of full recovery, suggests that this consensus statement requires an update in a few years. Conclusion: Based on available evidence, olfaction could be long-lasting in PACS patients. However, according to expert consensus statements, AD olfactory screening is not recommended for patients with a history of PACS until complete recovery has been confirmed in the literature, particularly for the identification sub-dimension. This consensus statement may require an update in a few years.
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 | 0.046 | 0.126 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".