Background: There is currently very limited information on the nature and prevalence of post-COVID-19 symptoms after hospital discharge. Methods: A purposive sample of 100 survivors discharged from a large University hospital were assessed 4 to 8 weeks after discharge by a multidisciplinary team of rehabilitation professionals using a specialist telephone screening tool designed to capture symptoms and impact on daily life. EQ-5D-5L telephone version was also completed. Results: Participants were between 29 and 71 days (mean 48 days) postdischarge from hospital. Thirty-two participants required treatment in intensive care unit (ICU group) and 68 were managed in hospital wards without needing ICU care (ward group). New illness-related fatigue was the most common reported symptom by 72% participants in ICU group and 60.3% in ward group. The next most common symptoms were breathlessness (65.6% in ICU group and 42.6% in ward group) and psychological distress (46.9% in ICU group and 23.5% in ward group). There was a clinically significant drop in EQ5D in 68.8% in ICU group and in 45.6% in ward group. Conclusions: This is the first study from the United Kingdom reporting on postdischarge symptoms. We recommend planning rehabilitation services to manage these symptoms appropriately and maximize the functional return of COVID-19 survivors.

T HIS paper presents an experiment on reactions to communication and on attitude changes by individuals whose initial stands on a controversial social issue diverged in varying degrees from positions advocated in communication. Study of the relationship between subject's (S's) attitude and the position advocated in communication may help resolve some apparently contradictory effects of communication aimed at changing attitudes.Attempts to change attitudes in the direction advocated by communication on a social issue at times produce shifts in the direction opposite to that intended-the "boomerang effect." While numerous investigators have reported shifts of average test scores in the direction of communication ( 4), a fairly common finding, even in these studies, is that some individuals shift their stand away from that presented in communication. Several studies reporting both positive and negative shifts in attitudes toward out-groups following communication are summarized by Williams (20).Thus, at times, persuasive communication produces a bi-modal distribution of attitude scores (11, pp. 874-875). For example, Remitters (12) obtained positive shifts on average scores following communications on conservation, social insurance and labor unions, but the latter communication ''sharply divided 1 This investigation was conducted as part of the Yale Communication Research Program. This series of studies, devoted to an analysis of factors related to attitude and opinion formation, is financed by a grant to Carl I. Hovland from the Rockefeller Foundation, whose support is gratefully acknowledged. Thanks are extended to Dr. Charles Shedd, now of Berea College, Mr. William Smith, and Mr. Richard Disney who participated in developing the procedures and in writing the communications used. We are also grateful to Dr. Laurence H. Snyder, Dean of the Graduate College, University of Oklahoma, for necessary administrative arrangements, and to Drs. Irving L. Janis, Robert P. Abelson, and Jack W. Brehm for suggestions made in the course of reading the manuscript.

No abstract

No abstract

ONE OF THE most frequently investigated situations m social psychology IS that in which an individual is confronted with evidence that another person holds opinions in disagjreement with his own The present study is concerned with the mfluence of two major variables on the jKychological processes employed by the individual to deal with this situation of incongruency (o) his initial attitudes toward the other person and (fc) the degree of discrepancy between the two sets of opmions Of the many possible ways of approachmg this problem, we chose that of exposing the individual to evaluations of himself which were apparently made by another person of either high or low authoritativeness and which were less favorable than his self-evaluations in systematically varied amounts Thus, the two independent variables of this study are the authoritativeness of the source from whom the unfavorable evaluations presumably came (i e , an acquaintance who knows the recipient well vs a stranger who knows little about him) and the degree of unfavorableness of the ratings (four degrees from slight to very high) as compared with the recipient's ratings of himself It IS not assumed that the results and generalizations reported here would be appropnate if the ratings attributed to the source were more favorable than the recipient's self-ratingsThe theoretical formulation of this research follows that of an This research was pcrforined while the authors were at Yale University, as part of the CommtanicabOTi Research Program wbich is supported by The RodeefeUer Fonndatioii and uiKier the direction of Carl I Hovland The authors are indebted to teadiers and students at New Haven State Teachers College whose generous co-operation made this res«urch possible While we assume fuU responsibility for this paper, we are grateful to Arthur R Cohen, Carl Hovland, and Ben WiUennan for their suggestions on tiie manuscnpt