Cognitive rehabilitation improved self-reported cognitive skills in patients with Long COVID: An observational study 2025 Cherney et al

Abstract

Objective
To describe the effects of cognitive rehabilitation provided to patients with lingering cognitive difficulties or “brain fog” after COVID-19.

Design
Retrospective cohort study

Setting
Outpatient rehabilitation setting

Participants
Seventy consecutive patients with Long COVID that were referred from a Neuro-COVID clinic and evaluated and treated by speech-language pathologists

Interventions
Usual care cognitive rehabilitation

Main Outcome Measures
Patients completed the Quality of Life in Neurological Disorders (NeuroQoL) Cognition Function Short Form and the Rivermead Behavioral Memory Test Story Recall assessments before and after treatment. Demographics, goals, treatment frequency/duration, and interventions were analyzed to determine treatment outcomes and patterns of care.

Results
Of 70 patients, 83% were never hospitalized for COVID-19, the average age was 46.5 years, 77% were female and 69% were white. There were no differences in demographics, race, ethnicity or objective cognitive measures prior to starting treatment between the 50 individuals who completed their plan of care (POC) versus the 20 who did not. However, patients who did not complete their POC reported higher anxiety prior to treatment. Patients with higher anxiety prior to treatment demonstrated less improvement in cognitive quality of life measures following treatment. Of the 50 patients who completed their POC, 45 (90%) met all short-term goals. There was a significant increase in NeuroQoL Cognition Function scores from pre- to post cognitive rehabilitation in 36 patients tested, but no significant differences in objective measures of memory in 23 patients tested.

Conclusion
Cognitive rehabilitation resulted in self-reported improvement in functional cognition. However, anxiety limited the favorable impact of treatment and should be addressed in conjunction with cognitive therapy to maximize outcomes.

Paywall

 

"Correlation doesn't equal causation" is something they teach to primary-school children, but apparently you can skip that lesson and still go on to be a scientist.

 

Open-label, subjective outcomes (self-reported cognition), and no controls.

 

It's so hard to accept that they aren't really just fucking with us on purpose, that this isn't just a giant joke that everyone but us is in on it. It's too mediocre to believe that such a level of ridiculously blatant bias can exist in any profession.

It's very easy to see why there hasn't been any progress so far. This way of doing things has zero chance of achieving anything.

Also this is obviously not an observational study. Or even a real study. It has the same level of rigor as homeopathy. But who cares about the meaning of words, right?