ReviewJournal of neurology2023
Pitfalls and biases in neuroepidemiological studies of COVID-19 and the nervous system: a critical appraisal of the current evidence and future directions.
Review in Journal of neurology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Single-arm clinical trials: design, ethics, principles.BMJ supportive & palliative care · 2024Review
- Intracranial complications of sinogenic and otogenic infections in children: an ESPN survey on their occurrence in the pre-COVID and post-COVID era.Child's nervous system : ChNS : official journal of the International Society for Pediatric Neurosurgery · 2024Article
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 at 8 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNeurological manifestations frequently occur in individuals with COVID-19, manifesting during the acute phase, persisting beyond the resolution of acute symptoms, and appearing days or weeks after the initial onset of COVID-19 symptoms. However, predicting the incidence, course, and outcome of these neurological manifestations at the individual patient level remains challenging. Biases in study design and limitations in data collection may contribute to the inconsistency and limited validity of the reported findings. Herein, we focused on critically appraising pitfalls and biases of prior reports and provide guidance for improving the quality and standardization of future research. Patients with COVID-19 exhibit diverse demographic features, sociocultural backgrounds, lifestyle habits, and comorbidities, all of which can influence the severity and progression of the infection and its impact on other organ systems. Overlooked or undocumented comorbidities and related treatments may contribute to neurological sequelae, which may not solely be attributable to COVID-19. It is crucial to consider the potential side effects of vaccines in relation to neurological manifestations.
conclusionTo investigate neurological manifestations of COVID-19, it is essential to employ valid and reliable diagnostic criteria and standard definitions of the factors of interest. Although population-based studies are lacking, well-defined inception cohorts, including hospitalized individuals, outpatients, and community residents, can serve as valuable compromises. These cohorts should be evaluated for the presence of common comorbidities, alongside documenting the primary non-neurological manifestations of the infectious disease. Lastly, patients with COVID-19 should be followed beyond the acute phase to assess the persistence, duration, and severity of neurological symptoms, signs, or diseases.
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.