MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6907591174 · doi:10.23668/psycharchives.14687

Long COVID Brain Fog Treatment: Findings from a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of Constraint-Induced Cognitive Therapy

2024· preprint· en· W6907591174 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology Archives · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLong-Term Effects of COVID-19
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialActivities of daily livingCognitionCrossover studyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)RehabilitationAcquired brain injuryCognitive impairment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Long COVID brain fog is often disabling. Yet, no empirically-supported treatments exist. This study’s objectives were to evaluate feasibility and efficacy, provisionally, of a new rehabilitation approach, Constraint-Induced Cognitive Therapy (CICT), for post-COVID-19 cognitive sequelae. Design: Sixteen community-residents ≥ 3-months post-COVID-19 infection with mild cognitive impairment and dysfunction in instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) were enrolled. Participants were randomized to Immediate-CICT or treatment-as-usual (TAU) with crossover to CICT. CICT combined behavior change techniques modified from Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy with Speed of Processing Training, a computerized cognitive-training program. CICT was deemed feasible if (a) ≥80% of participants completed treatment, (b) the same found treatment highly satisfying and at most moderately difficult, and (c) <2 study-related, serious adverse-events occurred. The primary outcome was IADL performance in daily life (Canadian Occupational Performance Measure). Employment status and brain fog (Mental Clutter Scale) were also assessed. Results: Fourteen completed Immediate-CICT (n=7) or TAU (n=7); two withdrew from TAU before their second testing session. Completers were [M (SD)]: 10 (7) months post-COVID; 51 (13) years old; 10 females, 4 males; 1 African American, 13 European American. All the feasibility benchmarks were met. Immediate-CICT, relative to TAU, produced very large improvements in IADL performance (M=3.7 points, p<.001, d=2.6) and brain fog (M=-4 points, p<.001, d=-2.9). Four of five non-retired Immediate-CICT participants returned-to-work post-treatment; no TAU participants did, p=.048. Conclusions: CICT has promise for reducing brain fog, improving IADL, and promoting returning-to-work in adults with Long COVID. Findings warrant a large-scale RCT with an active-comparison group.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.345 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychology ArchivesSame topicLong-Term Effects of COVID-19French-language works237,207