ArticleNeurology international2026
Neurocognitive and Neuropsychiatric Trajectories in a Post-COVID Cohort: A Descriptive Longitudinal Study.
Article in Neurology international, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCognitive dysfunction ("brain fog") is a common manifestation of post-acute COVID-19 syndrome (PACS) and may persist long after the acute infection. While cross-sectional studies have described cognitive deficits, longitudinal evidence on recovery trajectories remains limited.
methodsWe conducted a longitudinal observational study of neurocognitive performance and neuropsychiatric symptoms in patients with PACS. Participants underwent assessment with 20 standardized tests covering five cognitive domains (memory, attention, language, executive functions, psychomotor processing speed); anxiety, depression, and sleep quality were assessed at three time points. Changes were analysed using the Friedman test.
resultsForty-two patients were included (median age 57 years; 35.7% female) from a predominantly hospitalized cohort (81% hospitalised; 66.7% requiring respiratory support). Patients who completed all three assessments (completers, n = 42) were compared with those who attended the first evaluation but did not complete follow-up (non-completers, n = 544); completers were more severely ill during the acute phase rather than healthier or more motivated. At the group level, statistically significant improvements over time were observed across the whole sample in verbal short-term learning, visuospatial memory, working memory, constructional praxis, phonological verbal fluency, and psychomotor processing speed (all
conclusionIn this cohort, group-level performance improved in six of the twenty tests administered, of which three remained significant after correction for multiple comparisons, while 28 of 42 patients (66.7%) still scored in the impaired range on at least one test at 12 months, and 17 (40.5%) on two or more. These findings highlight the importance of long-term neuropsychological monitoring and integrated cognitive-psychiatric evaluation in post-COVID care. Given the small, predominantly hospitalized sample, improvements should be interpreted cautiously and confirmed in larger controlled studies, although the use of alternate forms for part of the battery makes task-specific learning an incomplete explanation.
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.