Predictors of non-recovery from fatigue and cognitive deficits after COVID-19: a prospective, longitudinal, population-based study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Despite the high prevalence and major disability associated with fatigue and cognitive deficits after SARS-CoV-2 infection, little is known about long-term trajectories of these sequelae. We aimed to assess long-term trajectories of these conditions and to identify risk factors for non-recovery. Methods: We analyzed longitudinal data from the population-based COVIDOM/NAPKON-POP cohort in Germany. Participants with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were assessed at least 6 months (baseline) and again at least 18 months (follow-up) after infection using the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue (FACIT-Fatigue) Scale (cutoff ≤ 30) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA, cutoff ≤ 25). Predictors of recovery from fatigue or cognitive deficits between assessments were identified through univariate and multivariable logistic regression models. The COVIDOM study is registered at the German registry for clinical studies (DRKS00023742) and at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04679584). Findings: Between 15 November 2020 and 9 May 2023, a total of 3038 participants were assessed at baseline (median 9 months after infection) and 83% responded to invitations for follow-up (median 26 months after infection). At baseline, 21% (95% confidence interval (CI) [20%, 23%]) had fatigue and 23% (95% CI [22%, 25%]) had cognitive deficits according to cutoff scores on the FACIT-Fatigue or MoCA. Participants with clinically relevant fatigue (at baseline) showed significant improvement in fatigue scores at follow-up (Hedges' g [95% CI] = 0.73 [0.60, 0.87]) and 46% (95% CI [41%, 50%]) had recovered from fatigue. Participants with cognitive deficits showed a significant improvement in cognitive scores (g [95% CI] = 1.12 [0.90, 1.33]) and 57% (95% CI [50%, 64%]) had recovered from cognitive deficits. Patients with fatigue exhibiting a higher depressive symptom burden and/or headache at baseline were significantly less likely to recover. Significant risk factors for cognitive non-recovery were male sex, older age and <12 years of school education. Importantly, SARS-CoV-2 reinfection had no significant impact on recovery from fatigue or cognitive deficits. Interpretation: Fatigue and cognitive deficits are common sequelae after SARS-CoV-2 infection. These syndromes improved over time and about half of the patients recovered within two years. The identified risk factors for non-recovery from fatigue and cognitive deficits could play an important role in shaping targeted strategies for treatment and prevention. Funding: Funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF; grant number 01KX2121) and German Research Foundation (DFG) Excellence Cluster "Position Medicine in Information".
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".