Home › Research › How common it is
Cognitive deficits in people who have recovered from COVID-19
Hampshire A, Trender W, Chamberlain SR, Jolly AE, Grant JE, Patrick F, Mazibuko N, Williams SC et al.. EClinicalMedicine, 2021-07-23
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Background There is growing concern about possible cognitive consequences of COVID-19, with reports of 'Long COVID' symptoms persisting into the chronic phase and case studies revealing neurological problems in severely affected patients. However, there is little information regarding the nature and broader prevalence of cognitive problems post-infection or across the full spread of disease severity. Methods We sought to confirm whether there was an association between cross-sectional cognitive performance data from 81,337 participants who between January and December 2020 undertook a clinically validated web-optimized assessment as part of the Great British Intelligence Test, and questionnaire items capturing self-report of suspected and confirmed COVID-19 infection and respiratory symptoms. Findings People who had recovered from COVID-19, including those no longer reporting symptoms, exhibited significant cognitive deficits versus controls when controlling for age, gender, education level, income, racial-ethnic group, pre-existing medical disorders, tiredness, depression and anxiety. The deficits were of substantial effect size for people who had been hospitalised ( N = 192), but also for non-hospitalised cases who had biological confirmation of COVID-19 infection ( N = 326). Analysing markers of premorbid intelligence did not support these differences being present prior to infection. Finer grained analysis of performance across sub-tests supported the hypothesis that COVID-19 has a multi-domain impact on human cognition. Interpretation Interpretation. These results accord with reports of 'Long Covid' cognitive symptoms that persist into the early-chronic phase. They should act as a clarion call for further research with longitudinal and neuroimaging cohorts to plot recovery trajectories and identify the biological basis of cognitive deficits in SARS-COV-2 survivors. Funding Funding. AH is supported by the UK Dementia Research Institute Care Research and Technology Centre and Biomedical Research Centre at Imperial College London. WT is supported by the EPSRC Centre for Doctoral Training in Neurotechnology. SRC is funded by a Wellcome Trust Clinical Fellowship 110,049/Z/15/Z. JMB is supported by Medical Research Council (MR/N013700/1). MAM, SCRW and PJH are, in part, supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Hampshire, A., Trender, W., Chamberlain, SR., Jolly, A. E., Grant, J. E., Patrick, F., et al. (2021). Cognitive deficits in people who have recovered from COVID-19. EClinicalMedicine. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101044
Vancouver
Hampshire A, Trender W, Chamberlain SR, Jolly AE, Grant JE, Patrick F, et al. Cognitive deficits in people who have recovered from COVID-19. EClinicalMedicine. 2021. doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101044. PMID: 34316551.
BibTeX
@article{hampshire2021-34316551,
author = {Hampshire, A. and Trender, W. and Chamberlain, SR. and Jolly, A. E. and Grant, J. E. and Patrick, F. and Mazibuko, N. and Williams, S. C. and others},
title = {{Cognitive deficits in people who have recovered from COVID-19}},
journal = {EClinicalMedicine},
year = {2021},
doi = {10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101044},
pmid = {34316551},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101044}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Findings People who had recovered from COVID-19, including those no longer reporting symptoms, exhibited significant cognitive deficits versus controls when controlling for age, gender, education level, income, racial-ethnic group, pre-existing medical disorders, tiredness, depression and anxiety.
- These results accord with reports of 'Long Covid' cognitive symptoms that persist into the early-chronic phase.
Why it matters
This cross-sectional study found that people who had recovered from COVID-19 showed significant cognitive deficits compared with controls, with larger deficits in those who had been hospitalised. It is about cognitive problems after COVID-19 and does not test any treatment, cure, or prevention for Alzheimer's disease.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Alzheimer's in numbers →
Study details
- Study designcross-sectional
- Participants192
- Evidence strengthModerate
How this study scored 67/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is a snapshot of people at one point in time. Scored zero for effect reported and randomized / blinded because the record does not state it.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (EClinicalMedicine) |
| Journal's citation record | 2 / 4 | EClinicalMedicine: journal h-index 150 (OpenAlex, 2026-10-29) |
| Study design | 4 / 12 | A snapshot of people at one point in time |
| Strength of evidence | 3 / 5 | Rated “moderate” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 3 / 5 | 2021 — within 6 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 2 / 4 | 192 participants |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| Randomized / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomization or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | 6 / 7 | Cited 706 times (OpenAlex, 2026-10-10) |
| Citations per year | 5 / 5 | 100.9 citations a year over 7 year(s) since 2021 |
| Impact for its field and year | 6 / 6 | Cited 58.2× the average for papers of its field and year (OpenAlex FWCI) |
| Cited by studies here | 1 / 6 | Cited by 2 other studies in this library |
| Still being cited | 4 / 4 | Cited 262 times in 2024–2026 (2026 still in progress; OpenAlex) |
| Senior author's track record | 3 / 4 | Last-listed author Mitul Ashok Mehta: h-index 65 (OpenAlex, whole career) |
| Institution's track record | 2 / 3 | University of Cambridge: institution h-index 1,973 (OpenAlex) |
| Multicenter collaboration | 2 / 3 | OpenAlex lists 5 institution(s) in 2 countries |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 34316551) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Total | 67 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
- DOI: 10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101044
- PubMed: 34316551
- Original source →
- Free full text: EClinicalMedicine →
Full text: free to read — OpenAlex lists this copy as free to read: the link above (checked 6 Feb 1020).
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.
Later studies that cite this one
2 studies in the alzhub library list this one in their references.
Related studies in How common it is
Also tagged “controlled”
1,116 studies in the library carry the topic tag “controlled”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 1,116 tagged studies.