Cognition and Memory after Covid-19 in a Large Community Sample
Open accessAbstract
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.).
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The REACT study in England involving over 140,000 participants revealed that COVID-19 leads to persistent objective cognitive deficits lasting for one year or more after infection.
“The Real-time Assessment of Community Transmission (REACT) study conducted in England involving over 140,000 participants revealed that COVID-19 leads to persistent objective cognitive deficits lasting for one year or more after infection.284”
From Antiageing strategy for neurodegenerative diseases: from mechanisms to clinical advances (2025) · cites this paper as [284]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 43 · Cited by 268
- Authors
- Hampshire, A., Azor, A., Atchison, C., Trender, W., Hellyer, P. J., Giunchiglia, V., Husain, M., Cooke, G. S., Cooper, E., Lound, A., Donnelly, C. A., Chadeau-Hyam, M., Ward, H., & Elliott, P.
- Affiliations
- King's College London (GB)
- From the Department of Brain Sciences (A.H., A.A., W.T., V.G.), MRC Centre for Environment and Health (M.C.-H., P.E.), School of Public Health (C.A., E.C., A.L., C.A.D., M.C.-H., H.W., P.E.), and the Department of Infectious Disease (G.S.C.), Imperial College London, the National Institute for Health Research Imperial Biomedical Research Centre (C.A., G.S.C., E.C., A.L., H.W., P.E.), the Centre for Neuroimaging Sciences, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology, and Neuroscience, King’s College London (P.J.H.), Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust (G.S.C., H.W., P.E.), Health Data Research U.K. London at Imperial (P.E.), and U.K. Dementia Research Institute at Imperial (P.E.), London, and the Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences (M.H.), the Departments of Experimental Psychology (M.H.) and Statistics (C.A.D.), and the Pandemic Sciences Institute (C.A.D.), University of Oxford, Oxford — all in the United Kingdom.
- Corresponding author
- Hampshire, Adam
- ORCID
- Venue
- New England Journal of Medicine
- Publisher
- Massachusetts Medical Society
- Published
- 2024-02-29
- Volume
- 390
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 806-818
- ISSN
- 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-4406
- PMC
- PMC7615803
- OpenAlex
- W4392243692
- Cited by
- 268
- References
- 43
- Citations by year
- 2026: 78 · 2025: 118 · 2024: 72
- FWCI
- 71.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
- Spiral (Imperial College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- National Institute for Health and Care Research (COV-LT-0040, MR/V030841/1)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Long-Term Effects of COVID-19
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
- Keywords
- post-COVID cognitive impairment, long COVID, COVID-19 pandemic, persistent symptoms, executive function, memory impairment, brain fog, cognitive impairment, SARS-CoV-2 variants, B.1.1.7 variant, hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, cognitive assessment, community sample
- MeSH terms
- COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome, Adult, Cognition, England, Humans, Memory, Memory Disorders, Cognitive Dysfunction
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review