ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2023
Investigating brain cortical activity in patients with post-COVID-19 brain fog.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Investigating the Impact of Guided Imagery on Stress, Brain Functions, and Attention: A Randomized Trial.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Trial
- Persistent neurological sequelae in children and adolescents after SARS-CoV-2: a scoping review.Infection · 2026Article
- Cognitive and Psychological Symptoms in Post-COVID-19 Condition: A Systematic Review of Structural and Functional Neuroimaging, Neurophysiology, and Intervention Studies.Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation · 2025Review
- Recurrent and convolutional neural networks in classification of EEG signal for guided imagery and mental workload detection.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Fatigue and cognitive dysfunction in previously hospitalized patients with COVID-19: A 1-year follow-up.PloS one · 2024Article
- 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Brain fog is a kind of mental problem, similar to chronic fatigue syndrome, and appears about 3 months after the infection with COVID-19 and lasts up to 9 months. The maximum magnitude of the third wave of COVID-19 in Poland was in April 2021. The research referred here aimed at carrying out the investigation comprising the electrophysiological analysis of the patients who suffered from COVID-19 and had symptoms of brain fog (sub-cohort A), suffered from COVID-19 and did not have symptoms of brain fog (sub-cohort B), and the control group that had no COVID-19 and no symptoms (sub-cohort C). The aim of this article was to examine whether there are differences in the brain cortical activity of these three sub-cohorts and, if possible differentiate and classify them using the machine-learning tools. he dense array electroencephalographic amplifier with 256 electrodes was used for recordings. The event-related potentials were chosen as we expected to find the differences in the patients' responses to three different mental tasks arranged in the experiments commonly known in experimental psychology: face recognition, digit span, and task switching. These potentials were plotted for all three patients' sub-cohorts and all three experiments. The cross-correlation method was used to find differences, and, in fact, such differences manifested themselves in the shape of event-related potentials on the cognitive electrodes. The discussion of such differences will be presented; however, an explanation of such differences would require the recruitment of a much larger cohort. In the classification problem, the avalanche analysis for feature extractions from the resting state signal and linear discriminant analysis for classification were used. The differences between sub-cohorts in such signals were expected to be found. Machine-learning tools were used, as finding the differences with eyes seemed impossible. Indeed, the A&B vs. C, B&C vs. A, A vs. B, A vs. C, and B vs. C classification tasks were performed, and the efficiency of around 60-70% was achieved. In future, probably there will be pandemics again due to the imbalance in the natural environment, resulting in the decreasing number of species, temperature increase, and climate change-generated migrations. The research can help to predict brain fog after the COVID-19 recovery and prepare the patients for better convalescence. Shortening the time of brain fog recovery will be beneficial not only for the patients but also for social conditions.
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.