Understanding The Episodic Nature Of Symptom Profiles And Functional Status In Individuals With Long COVID.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: It has been reported that there are 65 million people globally living with long COVID. Widely reported symptoms include fatigue, malaise, dyspnoea, and cognitive dysfunction which severely restrict individuals ability to participate in everyday activities, however there is limited data highlighting the episodic symptoms. Accordingly, we conducted a 16-week cohort observation to understand the symptom profiles and functional capacity of those with long COVID. METHOD: Sixty-five participants (75.4% female, 51 ± 11 years) were recruited from LC clinics in the United Kingdom to a 16-week cohort observation study. On the baseline visit and each follow up visit (every 4 weeks), participants completed a self-paced 6MWT (total 6-minute-walk-distance [6MWD], %SpO2 and rate of perceived exertion measured following completion), Time-Up-And-Go Test (TUG), and a range of validated self-reported outcome measures (fatigue assessment scale [FAS], post-COVID-19-functional status scale [PCFS], symptom score and montreal cognitive assessment [MoCA], MRC dyspnoea scale). RESULTS: Repeated measure ANOVA and post-hoc analysis highlighted that 6MWD (p < .001) and post completion RPE signigicantly fluctuated across the 16-weeks (p = .033), and remained lower than normative values for healthy age matched controls, however there was no sigfniciant difference in SPo2 across the 16-weeks post completion. TUG also significantly fluctuated across the 16 weeks (p < .001), however remained similar to the expected values for healthy controls. FAS (p = .021), PCFS (p = .006), and MoCA also significantly fluctuated over time (p = .001), however dyspnoea did not. CONCLUSION: The functional status of those with LC is lower than healthy age matched controls. Patients exhibit severely impacted QoL and FS that demonstrates little improvement over 16 weeks, and fluctuates with periods of improvement and deterioration over time. Our research highlights the episodic nature of long COVID symptoms, and research must inform treatment and support mechanisms that address this complex symptomology and restore QoL and FS. Gilead Sciences (#IN-UK-983-6080)
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".