Case-control study of neuropsychiatric symptoms in electronic health records following COVID-19 hospitalization in 2 academic health systems

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article See related articles

Abstract

No abstract available

Article activity feed

  1. SciScore for 10.1101/2021.07.09.21252353: (What is this?)

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

    Table 1: Rigor

    EthicsConsent: The Human Research Committee of Mass General-Brigham approved this research protocol, granting a waiver of requirement for informed consent as detailed by 45 CFR 46.116, because only secondary use of data generated by routine clinical care was required.
    Sex as a biological variablenot detected.
    Randomizationnot detected.
    Blindingnot detected.
    Power Analysisnot 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:
    A key strength of that study was use of standardized rating scales and consistent follow-up interval, both limitations in interpreting our results. However, while that study supports the prevalence of such symptoms, it does not allow comparison to similar patients with difficult hospital courses attributable to other causes. That is, that study demonstrates that post-hospital course may be chronic in individuals with COVID-19, but not necessarily that this outcome is specific to COVID-19. Our results suggest that they may not be. Among the more notable findings in the present study is the relative decrease in prevalence of mood and anxiety symptoms relative to non-COVID-19 patients. Among outpatients, these rates have been suggested to be elevated[2,4], consistent with a large survey-based study that also suggested differences in symptomatology[17]. The effects we observe may be specific to more severely ill individuals, such as those previously hospitalized. Some prior work may also reflect characteristics of particular subgroups, such as US military veterans (with likelihood of greater comorbidity[2]) or commercially-insured[4]; a strength of this study is the inclusion of the full spectrum of payers. Our discordant results also reflect the capture and documentation of symptoms, rather than diagnoses per se, in the present study – i.e., we are quantifying a different phenotype. At minimum, further investigation is needed to better understand these highly prevalent sequelae....

    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.

    Results from scite Reference Check: We found no unreliable references.


    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.