Cognition and psychological well-being in adults with post COVID-19 condition and analyses of symptom sequelae
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic moves into its fourth year, gaining a better clinical understanding of individuals with post COVID-19 condition is paramount. The current study examined the neurocognitive and psychological status of adults with post COVID-19 condition, as well as explored the impact of high psychological burden on objective neurocognitive functioning and the relationship between subjective cognitive concerns and objective neurocognitive findings. METHOD: Valid neuropsychological assessments were completed with 51 symptomatic adults who were 297.55 days, on average, following a confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Participants completed brief self-report depression, anxiety, and PTSD questionnaires, a questionnaire with subjective ratings of cognitive abilities, and standardized neurocognitive tests that examined performance validity, attention, processing speed, verbal learning and memory, naming, visual construction, and executive functioning. RESULTS: percentile) at a group level. Approximately half (49.02%) of the participants reported co-occurring mental health symptoms that were considered clinically elevated based on questionnaire results. High psychological symptom burden was associated with greater subjective cognitive difficulties but did not result in neurocognitive dysfunction on objective testing. CONCLUSIONS: This study contributes to the literature regarding post COVID-19 condition in adults including the relationship between the cognitive and psychological symptoms. Results are summarized in key clinical learning points.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".