Objective: The illness resulting from Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), better known as COVID-19, has quickly escalated to a worldwide pandemic. Although understanding of the short and long-term manifestations of COVID-19 remains incomplete, there is a preponderance of respiratory pathology in COVID-19 and potential for chronic loss of pulmonary function in recovered patients, raising concerns for associated cognitive impacts. Method: We conducted a narrative review of the existing literature on neuropsychological variables in acute/severe respiratory disease and various forms of chronic pulmonary disease to inform expectations about potential cognitive manifestations of COVID-19. Results: Cognitive dysfunction is common but not inevitable in acute and chronic pulmonary disease, although unique predictors and symptom trajectories appear to be associated with each. Conclusions: Although the full scope of neuropathophysiology associated with COVID-19 remains to be established, pulmonary insults associated with the disease are likely to produce cognitive dysfunction in a substantial percentage of patients.
Describes how there are unsolved problems within the philosophy of
the social sciences, which cannot provide a coherent account of a style
of science which is based on either explanation or understanding. No
easy combination of elements from the empiricist and hermeneutic
approaches is possible because of radically different epistemologies.
Shows how, against this background of philosophical insecurity, action
science seems to offer new possibilities by incorporating a form of
practice of research which is aimed at understanding meaning, while at
the same time retaining enough of the characteristics of the ideal of
scientific reliability (hard data, explicit inference, public testing)
to free it from the danger of uncritically adopting the internal
viewpoint of participants. It is free from commitment to empiricist
epistemological principles, so that it can combine elements of the
explanatory and interpretative poles in a coherent way. Argues that it
is a valuable contribution which can advance the discussion within the
philosophy of the social sciences.
Despite being one of the most widely used measures in clinical neuropsychology, the Trail Making Test is highly reliant on intact vision and motor functioning. Given that these capacities are often compromised in patients requiring neuropsychological evaluation, various authors have proposed methods for adapting the Trail Making Test for oral administration. To date, a number of administration and score transformation methods have been proposed. We reviewed the existing literature on oral adaptation of the Trail Making Test in order to provide recommendations for practicing clinicians wishing to use the measure, and to highlight directions for future research.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.