ArticleScientific reports2025
Validity of the test for attentional performance in neurological post-COVID condition.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Brain microstructural alterations in COVID-19: a systematic review of diffusion weighted imaging studies.Brain imaging and behavior · 2026Pooled it
- Exploring cortical excitability modulation to promote cognitive resilience in aging: an rTMS study protocol.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Article
- Take Fatigue or Fatigues into Account in Physiotherapy Interventions? A Rapid Scoping Review.Physical therapy research · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Neurological post-COVID condition (PCC) often involves attentional deficits that impact daily functioning. Traditional paper-based tests, like the Trail-Making Test (TMT), may inadequately capture these impairments due to their short duration and dependence on numerical and alphabetic sequencing. This study evaluates the validity of three subtests of the computerized Test for Attentional Performance (TAP) as alternatives for detecting attentional impairments in PCC. In the ongoing NEURO LC-19 DE study, 108 subjects aged 18 to 79 years, with PCC-related cognitive complaints (n = 67, 73% f) and healthy controls (n = 41, 56% f) underwent neuropsychological testing. The prevalence of impairment and classification ability of the TAP subtests were evaluated alongside standard paper-based tests, including the TMT and Montreal Cognitive Assessment, using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and regression. The TAP subtests identified significant impairments in sustained attention and processing speed in one-third of PCC patients, surpassing traditional tests in sensitivity, and classifying PCC with an AUC of 78%. Omissions in sustained attention significantly differentiated groups (OR = 1.14, p = 0.016, 95% CI [1.02-1.26]). Fatigue correlated with poorer performance on speed and accuracy (r > 0.30, p < 0.05). Cognitive slowing is prevalent in neurological PCC but is scarcely captured by conventional assessments. The TAP's computerized format with automated norming and independence from alphanumeric stimuli shows promise in improving the discriminatory ability for identifying attentional deficits in PCC patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.