Health-Related Quality of Life in Survivors of Wilms’ Tumor and Advanced Neuroblastoma: A Cross-Sectional Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: In pediatric oncology, Wilms' tumor and advanced neuroblastoma represent opposite ends of the spectra of survival probability and therapeutic intensity. Consequently, it was envisaged that survivors of Wilms' tumor would enjoy better health status and health-related quality of life (HRQL) than survivors of advanced neuroblastoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Health status questionnaires were sent to the parents of all eligible children and to the children themselves if they were > or = 8 years of age. Responses were received from 84% of 93 eligible families. Responses were converted by established algorithms into levels of two multiattribute health status classification systems known as Health Utilities Index Mark 2 and Mark 3. These systems are linked to measures of preference, in the form of multiattribute utility functions, which provide scores of morbidity for single-attribute levels and of global HRQL for comprehensive health states. RESULTS: A greater burden of morbidity was identified in the survivors of advanced neuroblastoma than in survivors of Wilms' tumor based on the assessments of the parents of these children. In particular, survivors of advanced neuroblastoma exhibited deficits in hearing and speech. It is possible that this morbidity burden reflects the prevalent use of platinum compounds (causing ototoxicity) in this group. Within parent-child dyads there was a high level of percentage agreement on responses in all attributes except cognition. CONCLUSION: Extension of this study to a larger sample size of patients will provide clarification of these observations.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".