MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414081554 · doi:10.1080/13803395.2025.2555610

Memory and metamemory performance in individuals with and without post-COVID-19 subjective cognitive symptoms

2025· article· en· W4414081554 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCognitive Functions and Memory
Canadian institutionsBC Children's HospitalVancouver Coastal Health Research InstituteBC Mental Health & Substance Use ServicesUniversity of British Columbia
FundersWeston Brain Institute
KeywordsMetamemoryCognitionMetacognitionDistressEpisodic memoryMemoriaCognitive biasPsychological distressTest (biology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Metamemory is the awareness of and ability to evaluate one’s own cognitive abilities. This study examined impaired metamemory as a possible mechanism contributing to persistent cognitive symptoms after COVID-19.Methods Individuals with previous COVID-19 illness were recruited. Participants completed questionnaires regarding physical health, mental health, and their COVID-19 illness. To assess memory and metamemory performance, participants were presented with 50 words and then completed a two-alternative forced choice recognition memory task with a confidence rating after each trial. This was repeated for 3 blocks of 50 trials each. A signal detection theory framework was applied to derive metrics of memory performance (d’), metamemory performance (meta-d’), and metamemory efficiency (M-ratio). We compared participants who self-reported persistent cognitive symptoms at the time of their metamemory assessment (n = 47) to participants who denied persistent cognitive symptoms (n = 87). We used a general linear model to compare groups, covarying for age and days between COVID-19 and metamemory assessment.Results Participants with and without self-reported persistent cognitive symptoms did not differ on memory performance (d’: p = .24, β = 0.22 95% CI [−0.1, 0.6]), metamemory performance (meta-d’: p = .28, β = 0.20 95% CI [−0.2, 0.6]), or metamemory efficiency (M-ratio: p = .85, β = −0.04 95% CI [−0.4, 0.3]). Those with persistent cognitive symptoms reported a higher degree of depression (p < 0.001, β = 0.83 95% CI [0.5, 1.2]), anxiety (p = 0.016, β = 0.50 95% CI [0.2, 0.9]), and somatic symptom scores (p < 0.001, β = 0.92 95% CI [0.5, 1.3]).Conclusions Patients with and without self-reported persistent cognitive symptoms had similar memory accuracy and both demonstrated good (synchronous) awareness of their memory test performance. While both cognitive and metacognitive impairment appear unlikely to drive cognitive symptoms after COVID-19, psychological distress (particularly anxiety) remains a compelling candidate perpetuating factor. Future mechanistic research is necessary to understand if and how psychological distress contributes to cognitive symptoms, and vice versa.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.671

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.377 · 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