MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385668219 · doi:10.9778/cmajo.20220248

Patient-reported outcomes of neurologic and neuropsychiatric symptoms in mild COVID-19: a prospective cohort study

2023· article· en· W4385668219 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Aravind Ganesh, Ryan E. Rosentreter, Yushi Chen, Rahul Mehta, Graham A. McLeod, Miranda Wan, Jonathan D. Krett, Yasamin Mahjoub, Angela S. Lee, Ilan S. Schwartz, Lawrence Richer, Luanne M. Metz, Eric E. Smith, Michael D. Hill

Bibliographic record

VenueCMAJ Open · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLong-Term Effects of COVID-19
Canadian institutionsWomen and Children’s Health Research InstituteUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCohortProspective cohort studyDepression (economics)Interquartile rangePhysical therapyQuality of life (healthcare)Cohort studyDysgeusiaPatient Health QuestionnairePediatricsPsychiatryInternal medicineAnxietyAdverse effect

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Background:</h3> Various neurologic manifestations have been reported in patients with COVID-19, mostly in retrospective studies of patients admitted to hospital, but there are few data on patients with mild COVID-19. We examined the frequency and persistence of neurologic/neuropsychiatric symptoms in patients with mild COVID-19 in a 1-year prospective cohort study, as well as assessment of use of health care services and patient-reported outcomes. <h3>Methods:</h3> Participants in the Alberta HOPE COVID-19 trial (hydroxychloroquine v. placebo for 5 d), managed as outpatients, were prospectively assessed 3 months and 1 year after their positive test result. They completed detailed neurologic/neuropsychiatric symptom questionnaires, the telephone version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (T-MoCA), the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10) and the EuroQol EQ-5D-3L (measure of quality of life). Close informants completed the Mild Behavioural Impairment Checklist (MBI-C) and the Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly. We also tracked use of health care services and neurologic investigations. <h3>Results:</h3> The cohort consisted of 198 participants (87 female [43.9%] median age 45 yr, interquartile range 37–54 yr). Of the 179 participants with symptom assessments, 139 (77.6%) reported at least 1 neurologic symptom, the most common being anosmia/dysgeusia (99 [55.3%]), myalgia (76 [42.5%]) and headache (75 [41.9%]). Forty patients (22.3%) reported persistent symptoms at 1 year, including confusion (20 [50.0%]), headache (21 [52.5%]), insomnia (16 [40.0%]) and depression (14 [35.0%]); 27/179 (15.1%) reported no improvement. Body mass index (BMI), a history of asthma and lack of full-time employment were associated with the presence and persistence of neurologic/neuropsychiatric symptoms; female sex was independently associated with both (presence: odds ratio [OR] adjusted for age, race, BMI, history of asthma and neuropsychiatric history 5.04, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.58 to 16.10). Compared to participants without persistent symptoms, those with persistent symptoms had more hospital admissions and family physician visits, and worse MBI-C scores and less frequent independence for instrumental activities at 1 year (83.8% v. 97.8%, <i>p</i> = 0.005). Patients with any or persistent neurologic symptoms had worse psychologic distress (K10 score ≥ 20: adjusted OR 12.1, 95% CI 1.4 to 97.2) and quality of life (median EQ-5D-3L visual analogue scale rating 75 v. 90, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001); 42/84 (50.0%) had a T-MoCA score less than 18 at 3 months, as did 36 (42.9%) at 1 year. Participants who reported memory loss were more likely than those who did not report such symptoms to have informant-reported cognitive-behavioural decline (1-yr MBI-C score ≥ 6.5: adjusted OR 15.0, 95% CI 2.42 to 92.60). <h3>Interpretation:</h3> Neurologic/neuropsychiatric symptoms were commonly reported in survivors of mild COVID-19, and they persisted in 1 in 5 patients 1 year later. Symptoms were associated with worse participant- and informant-reported outcomes. <b>Trial registration:</b>ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT04329611

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.803

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCMAJ OpenSame topicLong-Term Effects of COVID-19French-language works237,207