4 ms·
Yes, they do. The statement is basically verbatim from the article. They study findings are robust (n~=80000, pvals<1e-5).
by neuro007 5y ago
Yes, they do. The statement is basically verbatim from the article. They study findings are robust (n~=80000, pvals<1e-5).
- jMyles 5y agoTo be "basically verbatim," there would need to be a sentence making the same assertion with different wording. It's true that the paper appears to show cognitive differences lasting months among some subsets of people with previous COVID-19 infections in the UK. It is not true that the paper asserts that being a "COVID-19 survivor" reduces IQ by 7. This is not only not "basically verbatim", but not among the assertions made by this paper.
- mlyle 5y agoI suggest you actually read the paper. * Only the patients on a ventilator showed an effect anywhere near "7 IQ points" --- which was not a metric measured by the paper, but if we're going by about 1/2SD-- (n=44, not 80000). * The P values are impressive, still, but that doesn't mean that the control population chosen to be "like' the ventilator patients is really equivalent. * We already know that being in critical care or on a vent is bad for cognitive performance afterwards. Indeed, we know that being sick in any way is bad for cognitive performance for some time afterwards.