Long-term reduced functional capacity and quality of life in hospitalized COVID-19 patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Persistent symptoms and exercise intolerance have been reported after COVID-19, even months after the acute disease. Although, the long-term impact on exercise capacity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is still unclear. Research question To assess the long-term functional capacity and HRQoL in patients hospitalized due to COVID-19. Study design and methods This is a prospective cohort study, conducted at two centers in Brazil, that included post-discharge COVID-19 patients and paired controls. The cohort was paired by age, sex, body mass index and comorbidities, using propensity score matching in a 1:3 ratio. Patients were eligible if signs or symptoms suggestive of COVID-19 and pulmonary involvement on chest computed tomography. All patients underwent cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) and a HRQoL questionnaire (SF-36) 6 months after the COVID-19. The main outcome was the percentage of predicted peak oxygen consumption (ppVO2). Secondary outcomes included other CPET measures and HRQoL. Results The study sample comprised 47 post-discharge COVID-19 patients and 141 healthy controls. The mean age of COVID-19 patients was 54 ± 14 years, with 19 (40%) females, and a mean body mass index of 31 kg/m 2 (SD, 6). The median follow-up was 7 months (IQR, 6.5–8.0) after hospital discharge. PpVO2 in COVID-19 patients was lower than in controls (83% vs. 95%, p = 0.002) with an effect size of 0.38 ([95%CI], 0.04–0.70). Mean peak VO2 (22 vs. 25 mL/kg/min, p = 0.04) and OUES (2,122 vs. 2,380, p = 0.027) were also reduced in the COVID-19 patients in comparison to controls. Dysfunctional breathing (DB) was present in 51%. HRQoL was significantly reduced in post COVID patients and positively correlated to peak exercise capacity. Interpretation Hospitalized COVID-19 patients presented, 7 months after discharge, with a reduction in functional capacity and HRQoL when compared to historical controls. HRQoL were reduced and correlated with the reduced peak VO2 in our population.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".