ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Metacognition and cognitive dysfunction in post-COVID condition.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The mechanisms associated with cognitive issues in post-COVID condition (PCC) are still under debate. Metacognition refers to the ability to reflect and evaluate one's cognitive functioning and remains unexplored in this condition. This study aimed to investigate both local and global metacognition in individuals with PCC according to the presence of objective cognitive impairment and to assess the relationship between metacognitive abilities and fatigue, depression, and anxiety. Methods: A total of 74 PCC (mean age = 51.45 ± 8.74 years; 78.4% female) patients and 49 healthy controls (HC) (mean age = 49.55 ± 8.84 years; 85.7% female) were included in this cross-sectional study. All participants completed a comprehensive neuropsychological battery. Local metacognition was assessed through task-specific performance estimates, collected through predictions and postdictions of the performance in the neuropsychological assessment. Global metacognition was assessed via two self-report instruments. PCC patients were classified as cognitively preserved (PCC-CP = 43) and cognitively impaired (PCC-CI = 31). Results: PCC patients showed reduced accuracy in both local and global metacognition compared to HC. Regarding local metacognition, PCC-CI patients significantly overestimated their performance in attention, executive function and memory. For global metacognition, both PCC-CP and PCC-CI underestimated their global cognitive abilities compared to HC. Global metacognitive scores were negatively correlated with fatigue and depression only in the PCC-CP group. Conclusion: PCC exhibit impaired local and global metacognitive accuracy, with differences according to the presence of objective cognitive impairment. These findings underscore the importance of assessing cognitive performance and metacognitive abilities in PCC patients to better understand subjective cognitive complaints and inform targeted rehabilitation strategies.
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.