Cognition and Memory after Covid-19 in a Large Community Sample.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive symptoms after coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), the disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), are well-recognized. Whether objectively measurable cognitive deficits exist and how long they persist are unclear. METHODS: We invited 800,000 adults in a study in England to complete an online assessment of cognitive function. We estimated a global cognitive score across eight tasks. We hypothesized that participants with persistent symptoms (lasting ≥12 weeks) after infection onset would have objectively measurable global cognitive deficits and that impairments in executive functioning and memory would be observed in such participants, especially in those who reported recent poor memory or difficulty thinking or concentrating ("brain fog"). RESULTS: Of the 141,583 participants who started the online cognitive assessment, 112,964 completed it. In a multiple regression analysis, participants who had recovered from Covid-19 in whom symptoms had resolved in less than 4 weeks or at least 12 weeks had similar small deficits in global cognition as compared with those in the no-Covid-19 group, who had not been infected with SARS-CoV-2 or had unconfirmed infection (-0.23 SD [95% confidence interval {CI}, -0.33 to -0.13] and -0.24 SD [95% CI, -0.36 to -0.12], respectively); larger deficits as compared with the no-Covid-19 group were seen in participants with unresolved persistent symptoms (-0.42 SD; 95% CI, -0.53 to -0.31). Larger deficits were seen in participants who had SARS-CoV-2 infection during periods in which the original virus or the B.1.1.7 variant was predominant than in those infected with later variants (e.g., -0.17 SD for the B.1.1.7 variant vs. the B.1.1.529 variant; 95% CI, -0.20 to -0.13) and in participants who had been hospitalized than in those who had not been hospitalized (e.g., intensive care unit admission, -0.35 SD; 95% CI, -0.49 to -0.20). Results of the analyses were similar to those of propensity-score-matching analyses. In a comparison of the group that had unresolved persistent symptoms with the no-Covid-19 group, memory, reasoning, and executive function tasks were associated with the largest deficits (-0.33 to -0.20 SD); these tasks correlated weakly with recent symptoms, including poor memory and brain fog. No adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Participants with resolved persistent symptoms after Covid-19 had objectively measured cognitive function similar to that in participants with shorter-duration symptoms, although short-duration Covid-19 was still associated with small cognitive deficits after recovery. Longer-term persistence of cognitive deficits and any clinical implications remain uncertain. (Funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research and others.).

Validation of an abbreviated Big Five personality inventory at large population scale: Psychometric structure and associations with common psychiatric and neurological disorders.

BACKGROUND: The five-factor model of personality, as quantified using instruments such as the Big Five Inventory, consists of broad personality domains including Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism (emotional instability), and Openness. Such instruments typically include >40 items. However, instruments with many items can be unwieldly and a cause of measurement error in clinical and cohort studies where multiple scales are sequenced. Conversely, established 5- and 10-item versions of the Big Five Inventory have poor reliability. Here, we developed and validated an abbreviated 18-item Big Five Inventory that balances efficiency, reliability and sensitivity. METHOD: We analysed three datasets (N = 59,797, N = 21,177, and N = 87,983) from individuals who participated in the online Great British Intelligence Test (GBIT) study, a collaborative citizen science project with BBC2 Horizon. We applied factor analyses (FA), predictive normative modelling, and one-sample t-tests to validate the 18-item version of the Big Five and to investigate its associations with psychiatric and neurological conditions. RESULTS: The 18-item version of the Big Five Inventory had higher validity and retest reliability compared to the other previously shortened versions in the literature, with comparable demographic associations to the full Big Five Inventory. It exhibited strong (i.e. large effect size) associations with psychiatric conditions, and moderate (small-medium) associations with neurological conditions. Neuroticism (emotional instability) was substantially higher in all psychiatric conditions, whereas Conscientiousness, Openness and Extraversion showed differential associations across conditions. CONCLUSION: The newly validated 18-item version of the Big Five provides a convenient means of measuring personality traits that is suitable for deployment in a range of studies. It retains psychometric structure, retest reliability and clinical-group sensitivity, as compared to the full original scale.

Remote digital cognitive assessment reveals cognitive deficits related to hippocampal atrophy in autoimmune limbic encephalitis: a cross-sectional validation study.

Background: Autoimmune limbic encephalitis (ALE) is a neurological disease characterised by inflammation of the limbic regions of the brain, mediated by pathogenic autoantibodies. Because cognitive deficits persist following acute treatment of ALE, the accurate assessment of long-term cognitive outcomes is important for clinical assessments and trials. However, evaluating cognition is costly and an unmet need exists for validated digital methods. Methods: In this cross-sectional validation study, we investigated whether a remote digital platform could identify previously characterised cognitive impairments in patients with chronic ALE and whether digital metrics would correlate with standard neuropsychological assessment and hippocampal volume. Patients with ALE who had a chronic and stable presentation and received a clinical diagnosis of ALE were recruited for this study. The cognitive performance of 21 patients with ALE and 54 age-matched healthy controls - enrolled via the University of Oxford (UK) Cognitive Neurology Lab testing programme - was assessed with a battery of 12 cognitive tasks from the Cognitron online platform. The platform was optimised with National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) support to be deliverable remotely to elderly and patient groups. The primary outcome measure was behavioural performance and corresponding neuroimaging and neuropsychological assessment metrics. Findings: Between February 15, 2021, and April 21, 2022, 21 patients with ALE (mean age 63.01 years, 14 males) and 54 healthy controls (mean age 65.56 years, 23 males) completed the digital cognitive assessment. Patients with ALE performed significantly worse in memory, visuospatial abilities, executive function, and language. No impairments in digit & spatial span, target detection (attention) and emotion discrimination were observed. The global score on the online cognitive tasks correlated significantly with the established Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination III (ACE) pen-and-paper test. Deficits in visuospatial processing and language were identified in ALE compared to controls using remote digital testing but not using the ACE, highlighting higher sensitivity of computerised testing to residual cognitive impairment. Finally, the hippocampal volumes of patients with ALE and healthy controls correlated with online cognitive scores. Interpretation: These findings demonstrate that subtle cognitive deficits in patients with chronic ALE, who often show full recovery in measures of disability and dependence on daily activities, are detectable using a remote online platform, which also relates to hippocampal atrophy. Such methods may facilitate the characterisation of cognitive profiles in complex neurological diseases. Future longitudinal studies designed to assess the utility of such digital methods for further clinical characterisation are needed. Funding: The Wellcome Trust, Medical Research Council, National Institute for Health Research, Rhodes Scholarship, and the Berrow Foundation Scholarship.

Online cognitive monitoring technology for people with Parkinson's disease and REM sleep behavioural disorder.

Automated online cognitive assessments are set to revolutionise clinical research and healthcare. However, their applicability for Parkinson's Disease (PD) and REM Sleep Behavioural Disorder (RBD), a strong PD precursor, is underexplored. Here, we developed an online battery to measure early cognitive changes in PD and RBD. Evaluating 19 candidate tasks showed significant global accuracy deficits in PD (0.65 SD, p = 0.003) and RBD (0.45 SD, p = 0.027), driven by memory, language, attention and executive underperformance, and global reaction time deficits in PD (0.61 SD, p = 0.001). We identified a brief 20-min battery that had sensitivity to deficits across these cognitive domains while being robust to the device used. This battery was more sensitive to early-stage and prodromal deficits than the supervised neuropsychological scales. It also diverged from those scales, capturing additional cognitive factors sensitive to PD and RBD. This technology offers an economical and scalable method for assessing these populations that can complement standard supervised practices.

Cognitive and psychiatric symptom trajectories 2-3 years after hospital admission for COVID-19: a longitudinal, prospective cohort study in the UK.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is known to be associated with increased risks of cognitive and psychiatric outcomes after the acute phase of disease. We aimed to assess whether these symptoms can emerge or persist more than 1 year after hospitalisation for COVID-19, to identify which early aspects of COVID-19 illness predict longer-term symptoms, and to establish how these symptoms relate to occupational functioning. METHODS: The Post-hospitalisation COVID-19 study (PHOSP-COVID) is a prospective, longitudinal cohort study of adults (aged ≥18 years) who were hospitalised with a clinical diagnosis of COVID-19 at participating National Health Service hospitals across the UK. In the C-Fog study, a subset of PHOSP-COVID participants who consented to be recontacted for other research were invited to complete a computerised cognitive assessment and clinical scales between 2 years and 3 years after hospital admission. Participants completed eight cognitive tasks, covering eight cognitive domains, from the Cognitron battery, in addition to the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire for depression, the Generalised Anxiety Disorder 7-item scale, the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy Fatigue Scale, and the 20-item Cognitive Change Index (CCI-20) questionnaire to assess subjective cognitive decline. We evaluated how the absolute risks of symptoms evolved between follow-ups at 6 months, 12 months, and 2-3 years, and whether symptoms at 2-3 years were predicted by earlier aspects of COVID-19 illness. Participants completed an occupation change questionnaire to establish whether their occupation or working status had changed and, if so, why. We assessed which symptoms at 2-3 years were associated with occupation change. People with lived experience were involved in the study. FINDINGS: 2469 PHOSP-COVID participants were invited to participate in the C-Fog study, and 475 participants (191 [40·2%] females and 284 [59·8%] males; mean age 58·26 [SD 11·13] years) who were discharged from one of 83 hospitals provided data at the 2-3-year follow-up. Participants had worse cognitive scores than would be expected on the basis of their sociodemographic characteristics across all cognitive domains tested (average score 0·71 SD below the mean [IQR 0·16-1·04]; p<0·0001). Most participants reported at least mild depression (263 [74·5%] of 353), anxiety (189 [53·5%] of 353), fatigue (220 [62·3%] of 353), or subjective cognitive decline (184 [52·1%] of 353), and more than a fifth reported severe depression (79 [22·4%] of 353), fatigue (87 [24·6%] of 353), or subjective cognitive decline (88 [24·9%] of 353). Depression, anxiety, and fatigue were worse at 2-3 years than at 6 months or 12 months, with evidence of both worsening of existing symptoms and emergence of new symptoms. Symptoms at 2-3 years were not predicted by the severity of acute COVID-19 illness, but were strongly predicted by the degree of recovery at 6 months (explaining 35·0-48·8% of the variance in anxiety, depression, fatigue, and subjective cognitive decline); by a biocognitive profile linking acutely raised D-dimer relative to C-reactive protein with subjective cognitive deficits at 6 months (explaining 7·0-17·2% of the variance in anxiety, depression, fatigue, and subjective cognitive decline); and by anxiety, depression, fatigue, and subjective cognitive deficit at 6 months. Objective cognitive deficits at 2-3 years were not predicted by any of the factors tested, except for cognitive deficits at 6 months, explaining 10·6% of their variance. 95 of 353 participants (26·9% [95% CI 22·6-31·8]) reported occupational change, with poor health being the most common reason for this change. Occupation change was strongly and specifically associated with objective cognitive deficits (odds ratio [OR] 1·51 [95% CI 1·04-2·22] for every SD decrease in overall cognitive score) and subjective cognitive decline (OR 1·54 [1·21-1·98] for every point increase in CCI-20). INTERPRETATION: Psychiatric and cognitive symptoms appear to increase over the first 2-3 years post-hospitalisation due to both worsening of symptoms already present at 6 months and emergence of new symptoms. New symptoms occur mostly in people with other symptoms already present at 6 months. Early identification and management of symptoms might therefore be an effective strategy to prevent later onset of a complex syndrome. Occupation change is common and associated mainly with objective and subjective cognitive deficits. Interventions to promote cognitive recovery or to prevent cognitive decline are therefore needed to limit the functional and economic impacts of COVID-19. FUNDING: National Institute for Health and Care Research Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre, Wolfson Foundation, MQ Mental Health Research, MRC-UK Research and Innovation, and National Institute for Health and Care Research.