Cardiopulmonary rehabilitation’s influence on cognitive functions, psychological state, and sleep quality in long COVID-19 patients: A randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cognitive impairment, brain fog, depressive symptoms, and sleep disturbance are prevalent symptoms among individuals with long COVID, for which there currently is no treatment. AIM: To assess the effectiveness of an eight-week cardiopulmonary rehabilitation programme on cognition, psychological well-being, and sleep quality in individuals with long COVID-19. METHODS: Forty participants diagnosed with long COVID-19 (26 female, 14 male participants; mean age 53 ± 11 years) were randomly assigned to a rehabilitation group or to a control group. The control group maintained their regular daily habits, while the rehabilitation group was prescribed an individualized clinical programme consisting of three sessions per week. Each session involved light to moderate aerobic exercise, resistance training, and respiratory exercises. Neuropsychological tests evaluating executive function, memory, and processing speed were administered at baseline and at study completion. Participants also completed questionnaires on their psychological state and sleep quality at both time points. RESULTS: No difference between groups was observed for neuropsychological test performance, however significant group differences in perceived stress and depression were found post-intervention. CONCLUSION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05035628..
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 | 0.006 | 0.203 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".