ReviewArquivos de neuro-psiquiatria2022
NeuroCOVID-19: a critical review.
Review in Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Risk Factors and Outcomes in Pediatric Posterior and Anterior Circulation Arterial Ischemic Stroke: A Cross-Sectional Analysis.Iranian journal of child neurology · 2025Article
- Addressing Long COVID Sequelae and Neurocovid: Neuropsychological Scenarios and Neuroimaging Findings.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2024Review
- Acute Necrotizing Encephalopathy in Adult Patients With COVID-19: A Systematic Review of Case Reports and Case Series.Journal of clinical neurology (Seoul, Korea) · 2023Article
- Lowered Delta Activity in Post-COVID-19 Patients with Fatigue and Cognitive Impairment.Biomedicines · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has challenged neurologists since its early days. Neurology consultation services were then overloaded by emergency department and intensive-care patients with acute neurological syndromes. These complications are better explained today, but the growing number of patients with reported longstanding neurological symptoms constitute an emerging, complex, and still poorly understood phenomenon.
objectiveThis review summarizes data on relevant neurological manifestations of acute SARS-CoV-2 infection and lasting post-infectious disease, also known as Long COVID. The complex history of Long COVID is examined to illustrate the upsides and challenges imposed by the active participation of patient communities in the production of medical knowledge.
methodsNarrative review.
resultsInfection with the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 is associated with encephalopathy/delirium, cerebrovascular disease, headache, and peripheral nervous system involvement. Long COVID is a living concept jointly defined by patient communities, physicians and scientists, including neurologists.
conclusionCo-production of Long COVID knowledge between scientists and patients has initiated an era of patient-led research and evidence-based activism that acts as a two-edged sword - putting patient's suffering in the spotlight, but with a tradeoff in methodological consistency.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.