MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404866601 · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2024.1468204

The population based cognitive testing in subjects with SARS-CoV-2 (POPCOV2) study: longitudinal investigation of remote cognitive and fatigue screening in PCR-positive cases and negative controls

2024· article· en· W4404866601 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alina von Etzdorf, Maja Harzen, Hannah Heinrichs, H.H. Seifert, Stefan Jun Groiss, Carolin Balloff, Torsten Feldt, Björn‐Erik Ole Jensen, Tom Lüdde, Michaël Bernhard, Alfons Schnitzler, Klaus Goebels, Jörg Kraus, Sven G. Meuth, Saskia Elben, A Philipp

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Human Neuroscience · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLong-Term Effects of COVID-19
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionClinical psychologyPsychologyPopulationCognitive testMedicineLongitudinal studyGerontologyPsychiatryPathologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background The majority of people infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) only show mild respiratory symptoms. However, some patients with SARS-CoV-2 display neurological symptoms. Data on the exact prevalence and course of cognitive symptoms are often limited to patient reported outcomes or studies recruited at specialized centers. Methods For this prospective, non-interventional population based POPCOV2 study, 156 subjects who performed SARS-CoV-2 testing in the Düsseldorf metropolitan area at public test centers between December 2020 and February 2022 were recruited by handouts. SARS-CoV-2-positive and negatively tested subjects were included within the first seven days after the PCR test results. Cognitive testing was performed at baseline during home quarantine and after 4–6 as well as 12–14 weeks of follow-up. Individuals were examined remotely by videocalls using the Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in addition to the Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) and the Beck Depression Inventory-Fast Screen (BDI-FS). Results At baseline, the SARS-CoV-2-positive group presented with higher levels of fatigue in the BFI. In both the SARS-CoV-2-positive and SARS-CoV-2-negative groups, some subjects presented attention and memory deficits, defined as a z-score < −1,65 on the SDMT or < 26 points on the MoCA (SDMT: 22.9% in the positive and 8.8% in the negative group, p = 0.024; MoCA: 35.6% in the positive and 27.3% in the negative group, p = 0.313). MoCA and SDMT improved over time in both groups. For MoCA scores, a significant difference between the two groups was only seen at the first follow-up. SDMT z-scores did not differ at any time between the groups. Conclusion These results support previous evidence that mild SARS-CoV-2 infections are associated with increased fatigue. However, we found relevant rates of cognitive impairment not only in the infected but also in the control group. This underlines the importance of including a control group in such investigations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.065
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Human NeuroscienceSame topicLong-Term Effects of COVID-19French-language works237,207