ArticleBMJ open2024
Long COVID cognitive sequelae 6 months postinfection and beyond: a scoping review protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe novel and expanding field of long COVID research has undergone diverse methodological approaches in recent years. This protocol lays out the methodological approach, which aims at identifying nuances in current research. It underscores the necessity for a more precise understanding of prolonged cognitive sequelae and their relation to initial disease severity. The findings will add valuable insights for the development of targeted rehabilitation, healthcare interventions and thereby aid patients, clinicians, policymakers and researchers. Our upcoming research is introduced here. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: To map current research in the field, a scoping review will be conducted and documented in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Scoping Review Extension standards. A systematic search of scientific databases (PubMed, EMBASE), presented 1409 eligible results, published up to 21 December 2023. After removal of duplicates, 925 articles were extracted for screening. Two independent reviewers will screen for titles, abstracts and full texts, to extract data, which will then be organised using charting software. Data for various variables, that is, journal info, studied population demographics, study design, long COVID related data, cognitive outcomes and neuropsychological tests will be gathered. Descriptive analyses, evidence gap maps, heat map quantifications and narrative synthesis will be conducted for reporting of results.This scoping review has been registered with the Open Science Framework (https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/JHFX6). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required, as the study does not involve human participants. The findings will be disseminated through a publication in a scientific journal and within the professional network.
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.