Rehabilitation Is Associated With Improvements in Post–COVID-19 Sequelae
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Post-COVID-19 syndrome has affected millions of people, with rehabilitation being at the center of non-pharmacologic care. However, numerous published studies show conflicting results due to, among other factors, considerable variation in subject characteristics. Currently, the effects of age, sex, time of implementation, and prior disease severity on the outcomes of a supervised rehabilitation program after COVID-19 remain unknown. METHODS: This was a non-randomized case-control study. Subjects with post-COVID-19 sequelae were enrolled. Among study participants, those who could attend an 8-week, supervised rehabilitation program composed the intervention group, whereas those who couldn't the control group. Measurements were collected at baseline and 8 weeks thereafter. RESULTS: = 47) was associated with clinically important improvements in the 6-min walk test (6MWT) distance, adjusted (for potential confounders) odds ratio (AOR) 4.56 (95% CI 1.95-10.66); 1-min sit-to-stand test, AOR 4.64 (1.88-11.48); Short Physical Performance Battery, AOR 7.93 (2.82-22.26); health-related quality of life (HRQOL) 5-level EuroQol-5D (Visual Analog Scale), AOR 3.12 (1.37-7.08); Montreal Cognitive Assessment, AOR 6.25 (2.16-18.04); International Physical Activity Questionnaire, AOR 3.63 (1.53-8.59); Fatigue Severity Scale, AOR 4.07 (1.51-10.98); Chalder Fatigue Scale (bimodal score), AOR 3.33 (1.45-7.67); Modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale (mMRC), AOR 4.43 (1.83-10.74); Post-COVID-19 Functional Scale (PCFS), AOR 3.46 (1.51-7.95); and COPD Assessment Test, AOR 7.40 (2.92-18.75). Time from disease onset was marginally associated only with 6MWT distance, AOR 0.99 (0.99-1.00). Prior hospitalization was associated with clinically important improvements in the mMRC dyspnea scale, AOR 3.50 (1.06-11.51); and PCFS, AOR 3.42 (1.16-10.06). Age, sex, and ICU admission were not associated with the results of any of the aforementioned tests/grading scales. CONCLUSIONS: In this non-randomized, case-control study, post-COVID-19 rehabilitation was associated with improvements in physical function, activity, HRQOL, respiratory symptoms, fatigue, and cognitive impairment. These associations were observed independently of timing of rehabilitation, age, sex, prior hospitalization, and ICU admission.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".