Cognitive and Functional Capacity Assessment of Individuals Who Were Admitted to the Intensive Care Unit Due to COVID-19: A Prospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: The goal of this study was to identify changes in cognitive and functional capacity after hospital discharge in those infected with COVID-19 who were admitted to the ICU. Methods: This is a prospective cohort study carried out with individuals who were admitted to a hospital, from July 2021 to May 2022. The evaluations happened in three moments: at hospital discharge, 30 days after discharge and 90 days after discharge. The instruments applied are the following: handgrip dynamometer, Montreal Cognitive Assessment Basic questionnaire (MoCA-B), Barthel Index (BI), timed up and go test (TUG), hospital anxiety and depressive scale (HADS) and 36-Item Short Form Health Survey questionary (SF-36). Results: 74 individuals were eligible to participate in the study, 25 of which were followed for 90 days. Based on the results of the MoCA-b, there were no relevant cognitive changes after 3 months. According to the Barthel Index applied to each of the evaluations, the percentage of subjects that were classified as independent or minimally dependent was 48%, 92% then 96%, respectively, demonstrating that individuals can achieve a good degree of functional independence after 3 months. Despite that, the SF-36 demonstrated a score below the South Brazilian normal in some domains. Conclusion: The individuals studied did not present persistent cognitive changes after 3 months and functional capacity showed significant improvement during this period. However, when the assessment is about the self-perceived quality of life, the majority of domain values are still below expectations, deserving attention by the health professionals involved.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".