MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408169441 · doi:10.1186/s12916-025-03952-z

Psychiatric and neuropsychiatric sequelae of COVID-19 within 2 years: a multinational cohort study

2025· article· en· W4408169441 on OpenAlexaff
Yi Chai, Ivan Chun Hang Lam, Kenneth K. C. Man, Joseph Hayes, Eric Yuk Fai Wan, Xue Li, Celine Sze Ling Chui, Wallis C. Y. Lau, Xiaoyu Lin, Can Yin, Min Fan, Esther W. Chan, Ian Chi Kei Wong, Hao Luo

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLong-Term Effects of COVID-19
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersHealth and Medical Research FundNational Health and Medical Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilHong Kong GovernmentInnovation and Technology CommissionNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustEuropean CommissionAmgenFood and Health BureauPfizerGlaxoSmithKlineUniversity Grants CommitteeUK Research and InnovationBristol-Myers SquibbWellcome Trust
KeywordsMedicinePsychiatryCohortAnxietyPopulationCohort studyDepression (economics)PediatricsInternal medicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The long-term psychiatric and neuropsychiatric sequelae of COVID-19 across diverse populations remain not fully understood. This cohort study aims to investigate the short-, medium-, and long-term risks of psychiatric and neuropsychiatric disorders following COVID-19 infection in five countries. METHODS: This population-based multinational network study used electronic medical records from France, Italy, Germany, and the UK and claims data from the USA. The initial target and comparator cohorts were identified using an exact matching approach based on age and sex. Individuals diagnosed with COVID-19 or those with a positive SARS-CoV-2 screening test between December 1, 2019, and December 1, 2020, were included as targets. Up to ten comparators without COVID-19 for each target were selected using the propensity score matching approach. All individuals were followed from the index date until the end of continuous enrolment or the last healthcare encounter. Cox proportional hazard regression models were fitted to estimate the risk of incident diagnosis of depression, anxiety disorders, alcohol misuse or dependence, substance misuse or dependence, bipolar disorders, psychoses, personality disorders, self-harm and suicide, sleep disorders, dementia, and neurodevelopmental disorders within the first 6 months (short-term), 6 months to 1 year (medium-term), and 1 to 2 years (long-term) post-infection. RESULTS: A total of 303,251 individuals with COVID-19 and 22,108,925 individuals without COVID-19 from five countries were originally included. Within the first 6 months, individuals with COVID-19 had a significantly higher risk of any studied disorders in all databases, with Hazard Ratios (HRs) ranging from 1.14 (95% CI, 1.07-1.22) in Germany to 1.89 (1.64-2.17) in Italy. Increased risks were consistently observed for depression, anxiety disorders, and sleep disorders across almost all countries. During the medium- and long-term periods, higher risks were observed only for depression (medium-term: 1.29, 1.18-1.41; long-term: 1.36, 1.25-1.47), anxiety disorders (medium-term: 1.29, 1.20-1.38; long-term: 1.37, 1.29-1.47), and sleep disorders (medium-term: 1.10, 1.01-1.21; long-term: 1.14, 1.05-1.24) in France, and dementia (medium-term: 1.65, 1.28-2.10) in the UK. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that increased risks of psychiatric and neuropsychiatric outcomes were consistently observed only within, and not after, the 6-month observation period across all databases, except for certain conditions in specific countries.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.328 · 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

Citations12
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC MedicineSame topicLong-Term Effects of COVID-19French-language works237,207