与无严重医疗并发症的 COVID-19 急性感染后相关的神经认知和精神结果:一项荟萃分析。

IF 8.7 1区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Sarah A B Knapp, David S Austin, Stephen L Aita, Joshua E Caron, Tyler Owen, Nicholas C Borgogna, Victor A Del Bene, Robert M Roth, William P Milberg, Benjamin D Hill
{"title":"与无严重医疗并发症的 COVID-19 急性感染后相关的神经认知和精神结果:一项荟萃分析。","authors":"Sarah A B Knapp, David S Austin, Stephen L Aita, Joshua E Caron, Tyler Owen, Nicholas C Borgogna, Victor A Del Bene, Robert M Roth, William P Milberg, Benjamin D Hill","doi":"10.1136/jnnp-2024-333950","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cognitive symptoms are often reported by those with a history of COVID-19 infection. No comprehensive meta-analysis of neurocognitive outcomes related to COVID-19 exists despite the influx of studies after the COVID-19 pandemic. This study meta-analysed observational research comparing cross-sectional neurocognitive outcomes in adults with COVID-19 (without severe medical/psychiatric comorbidity) to healthy controls (HCs) or norm-referenced data.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data were extracted from 54 studies published between January 2020 and June 2023. Hedges' g was used to index effect sizes, which were pooled using random-effects modelling. Moderating variables were investigated using meta-regression and subgroup analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Omnibus meta-analysis of 696 effect sizes extracted across 54 studies (COVID-19 n=6676, HC/norm-reference n=12 986; average time since infection=~6 months) yielded a small but significant effect indicating patients with COVID-19 performed slightly worse than HCs on cognitive measures (g=-0.36; 95% CI=-0.45 to -0.28), with high heterogeneity (Q=242.30, p<0.001, τ=0.26). Significant within-domain effects was yielded by cognitive screener (g=-0.55; 95% CI=-0.75 to -0.36), processing speed (g=-0.44; 95% CI=-0.57 to -0.32), global cognition (g=-0.40; 95% CI=-0.71 to -0.09), simple/complex attention (g=-0.38; 95% CI=-0.46 to -0.29), learning/memory (g=-0.34; 95% CI=-0.46 to -0.22), language (g=-0.34; 95% CI=-0.45 to -0.24) and executive function (g=-0.32; 95% CI=-0.43 to -0.21); but not motor (g=-0.40; 95% CI=-0.89 to 0.10), visuospatial/construction (g=-0.09; 95% CI=-0.23 to 0.05) and orientation (g=-0.02; 95% CI=-0.17 to 0.14). COVID-19 samples with elevated depression, anxiety, fatigue and disease severity yielded larger effects.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Mild cognitive deficits are associated with COVID-19 infection, especially as detected by cognitive screeners and processing speed tasks. We failed to observe clinically meaningful cognitive impairments (as measured by standard neuropsychological instruments) in people with COVID-19 without severe medical or psychiatric comorbidities.</p>","PeriodicalId":16418,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Neurocognitive and psychiatric outcomes associated with postacute COVID-19 infection without severe medical complication: a meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Sarah A B Knapp, David S Austin, Stephen L Aita, Joshua E Caron, Tyler Owen, Nicholas C Borgogna, Victor A Del Bene, Robert M Roth, William P Milberg, Benjamin D Hill\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/jnnp-2024-333950\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Cognitive symptoms are often reported by those with a history of COVID-19 infection. No comprehensive meta-analysis of neurocognitive outcomes related to COVID-19 exists despite the influx of studies after the COVID-19 pandemic. This study meta-analysed observational research comparing cross-sectional neurocognitive outcomes in adults with COVID-19 (without severe medical/psychiatric comorbidity) to healthy controls (HCs) or norm-referenced data.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data were extracted from 54 studies published between January 2020 and June 2023. Hedges' g was used to index effect sizes, which were pooled using random-effects modelling. Moderating variables were investigated using meta-regression and subgroup analyses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Omnibus meta-analysis of 696 effect sizes extracted across 54 studies (COVID-19 n=6676, HC/norm-reference n=12 986; average time since infection=~6 months) yielded a small but significant effect indicating patients with COVID-19 performed slightly worse than HCs on cognitive measures (g=-0.36; 95% CI=-0.45 to -0.28), with high heterogeneity (Q=242.30, p<0.001, τ=0.26). Significant within-domain effects was yielded by cognitive screener (g=-0.55; 95% CI=-0.75 to -0.36), processing speed (g=-0.44; 95% CI=-0.57 to -0.32), global cognition (g=-0.40; 95% CI=-0.71 to -0.09), simple/complex attention (g=-0.38; 95% CI=-0.46 to -0.29), learning/memory (g=-0.34; 95% CI=-0.46 to -0.22), language (g=-0.34; 95% CI=-0.45 to -0.24) and executive function (g=-0.32; 95% CI=-0.43 to -0.21); but not motor (g=-0.40; 95% CI=-0.89 to 0.10), visuospatial/construction (g=-0.09; 95% CI=-0.23 to 0.05) and orientation (g=-0.02; 95% CI=-0.17 to 0.14). COVID-19 samples with elevated depression, anxiety, fatigue and disease severity yielded larger effects.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Mild cognitive deficits are associated with COVID-19 infection, especially as detected by cognitive screeners and processing speed tasks. We failed to observe clinically meaningful cognitive impairments (as measured by standard neuropsychological instruments) in people with COVID-19 without severe medical or psychiatric comorbidities.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16418,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2024-333950\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2024-333950","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:有 COVID-19 感染史的人经常会出现认知症状。尽管 COVID-19 大流行后有大量研究涌现,但目前还没有与 COVID-19 相关的神经认知结果的综合荟萃分析。本研究对观察性研究进行了荟萃分析,将 COVID-19(无严重内科/精神科合并症)成人患者的横断面神经认知结果与健康对照(HCs)或常模参照数据进行了比较:从2020年1月至2023年6月间发表的54项研究中提取数据。使用Hedges'g对效应大小进行指数化,并使用随机效应模型对效应大小进行汇总。使用元回归和亚组分析对调节变量进行了研究:对54项研究(COVID-19 n=6676, HC/norm-reference n=12 986; 感染后平均时间=~6个月)中提取的696个效应大小进行综合荟萃分析,结果表明COVID-19患者在认知测量方面的表现略差于HC(g=-0.36; 95% CI=-0.45至-0.28),异质性较高(Q=242.30, pConclusion):轻度认知障碍与 COVID-19 感染有关,尤其是通过认知筛选器和处理速度任务检测到的轻度认知障碍。在没有严重医疗或精神并发症的 COVID-19 感染者中,我们未能观察到有临床意义的认知障碍(通过标准神经心理学工具测量)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Neurocognitive and psychiatric outcomes associated with postacute COVID-19 infection without severe medical complication: a meta-analysis.

Background: Cognitive symptoms are often reported by those with a history of COVID-19 infection. No comprehensive meta-analysis of neurocognitive outcomes related to COVID-19 exists despite the influx of studies after the COVID-19 pandemic. This study meta-analysed observational research comparing cross-sectional neurocognitive outcomes in adults with COVID-19 (without severe medical/psychiatric comorbidity) to healthy controls (HCs) or norm-referenced data.

Methods: Data were extracted from 54 studies published between January 2020 and June 2023. Hedges' g was used to index effect sizes, which were pooled using random-effects modelling. Moderating variables were investigated using meta-regression and subgroup analyses.

Results: Omnibus meta-analysis of 696 effect sizes extracted across 54 studies (COVID-19 n=6676, HC/norm-reference n=12 986; average time since infection=~6 months) yielded a small but significant effect indicating patients with COVID-19 performed slightly worse than HCs on cognitive measures (g=-0.36; 95% CI=-0.45 to -0.28), with high heterogeneity (Q=242.30, p<0.001, τ=0.26). Significant within-domain effects was yielded by cognitive screener (g=-0.55; 95% CI=-0.75 to -0.36), processing speed (g=-0.44; 95% CI=-0.57 to -0.32), global cognition (g=-0.40; 95% CI=-0.71 to -0.09), simple/complex attention (g=-0.38; 95% CI=-0.46 to -0.29), learning/memory (g=-0.34; 95% CI=-0.46 to -0.22), language (g=-0.34; 95% CI=-0.45 to -0.24) and executive function (g=-0.32; 95% CI=-0.43 to -0.21); but not motor (g=-0.40; 95% CI=-0.89 to 0.10), visuospatial/construction (g=-0.09; 95% CI=-0.23 to 0.05) and orientation (g=-0.02; 95% CI=-0.17 to 0.14). COVID-19 samples with elevated depression, anxiety, fatigue and disease severity yielded larger effects.

Conclusion: Mild cognitive deficits are associated with COVID-19 infection, especially as detected by cognitive screeners and processing speed tasks. We failed to observe clinically meaningful cognitive impairments (as measured by standard neuropsychological instruments) in people with COVID-19 without severe medical or psychiatric comorbidities.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
15.70
自引率
1.80%
发文量
888
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry (JNNP) aspires to publish groundbreaking and cutting-edge research worldwide. Covering the entire spectrum of neurological sciences, the journal focuses on common disorders like stroke, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s disease, epilepsy, peripheral neuropathy, subarachnoid haemorrhage, and neuropsychiatry, while also addressing complex challenges such as ALS. With early online publication, regular podcasts, and an extensive archive collection boasting the longest half-life in clinical neuroscience journals, JNNP aims to be a trailblazer in the field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信