6-month neurological and psychiatric outcomes in 236 379 survivors of COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study using electronic health records

  1. Maxime Taquet
  2. John R Geddes
  3. Masud Husain
  4. Sierra Luciano
  5. Paul J Harrison

Reviewed by

Read the full article

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. Version published to 10.1016/s2215-0366(21)00084-5
  2. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2021.01.16.21249950: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    Institutional Review Board StatementIRB: TriNetX has a waiver from the Western Institutional Review Board since only aggregated counts and summaries of de-identified information are used.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot detected.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.

    Table 2: Resources

    No key resources detected.

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: We detected the following sentences addressing limitations in the study:
    Nevertheless, they have weaknesses inherent to an electronic health records study,28 such as the unknown completeness of records, lack of validation of diagnoses, and sparse information on socioeconomic and lifestyle factors. These issues primarily affect the incidence estimates rather than hazard ratios, but the choice of cohorts against which to compare COVID-19 outcomes influences the HRs (see Appendix Table S6). The analyses regarding encephalopathy deserve a note of caution. Even amongst hospitalized patients, only about 11% received this diagnosis, even though much higher rates would be expected.18,29 Under-recording of delirium and other altered mental states during acute illness is well known, and likely means that the diagnosed cases had prominent and/or sustained features; as such, results for this group should not be generalised to all patients with delirium. Finally, a study of this kind can only demonstrate associations; efforts to identify mechanisms and assess causality will require prospective cohort studies or more elaborate study designs.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • Thank you for including a funding statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  3. Version published to 10.1101/2021.01.16.21249950v1 on medRxiv