Family factors associated with academic achievement deficits in pediatric brain tumor survivors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to examine whether parental education, socioeconomic status, or family environment moderate the extent of academic achievement deficits in pediatric brain tumor survivors (PBTS) relative to classmate case-controls. PBTS are known to be at risk for cognitive and academic impairment; however, the degree of impairment varies. Prior research has focused on treatment risk, and efforts to examine the protective role of family resources and relationships have been lacking. METHODS: Pediatric brain tumor survivors (N = 164), ages 8-15 and 1-5 years posttreatment, were recruited at five treatment centers in the United States and Canada. A case-control classmate, matched for age, gender, and race, was recruited for each survivor. The Wide Range Achievement Test, a demographic form, and the Family Environment Scale were administered in families' homes. Treatment data were abstracted from medical charts. RESULTS: Pediatric brain tumor survivors demonstrated lower achievement than classmate-controls in reading, spelling, and arithmetic. Parental education and socioeconomic status were associated with levels of achievement demonstrated by PBTS but did not account for discrepancies between PBTS and classmate-controls. Deficits in achievement relative to classmate-controls, across all academic domains, were greater for survivors in families lower in support and higher in conflict. These associations remained after controlling for age at diagnosis, time since treatment, and whether treatment had involved chemotherapy, focal, or whole brain radiation. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the development of interventions to enhance family functioning as well as educational resources as part of intervention and rehabilitation services to optimize academic progress in children who have been treated for brain tumors.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".