Long-term neurological complications in COVID-19 survivors: study protocol of a prospective cohort study (NeurodegCoV-19)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests an association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and worse performance on cognitive tests, and a higher risk of Parkinson's disease (PD) and dementia up to 6 and 12 months after infection, respectively. Longer follow-ups with comparison groups are needed to clarify the potentially increased risk of neurodegenerative diseases in COVID-19 survivors, namely those infected before mass vaccination. METHODS: A prospective study started in July 2022 with four cohorts of 150 individuals each, defined according to SARS-CoV-2 infection and hospitalisation status between March 2020 and February 2021: cohort 1-hospitalised due to SARS-CoV-2 infection; cohort 2-hospitalised, COVID-19-free; cohort 3-infected, not hospitalised; cohort 4-not infected, not hospitalised. Cohort 2 will be matched to cohort 1 according to age, sex, level of hospitalisation care and length of stay; cohort 4 will be age-matched and sex-matched to cohort 3. Baseline, 1-year and 2-year follow-up evaluations will include: cognitive performance assessed with the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and neuropsychological tests; the assessment of prodromal markers of PD with Rapid Eye Movement Sleep Behaviour Disorder single-question Screen and self-reported olfactory and gustative alterations; screening of PD with the 9-item PD screening questionnaire; gait evaluation with Timed Up&Go test. Suspected cases of cognitive impairment and PD will undergo a clinical evaluation by a neurologist. Frequency measures of neurological complications, prodromal markers and diagnoses of dementia and PD, will be presented. The occurrence of cognitive decline-the difference between baseline and 1-year MoCA scores 1.5 SD below the mean of the distribution of the variation-will be compared between cohorts 1 and 2, and cohorts 3 and 4 with OR estimated using multivariate logistic regression. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study received ethics approval from the Ethics Committees of the health units Unidade Local de Saúde de Matosinhos and Centro Hospitalar de Entre Douro e Vouga, and informed consent is signed for participating. Results will be disseminated among the scientific community and the public.
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 | 0.015 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.005 |
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".