MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989597392 · doi:10.1038/clpt.2011.112

Chemotherapy and Cognitive Impairment: Treatment Options

2011· review· en· W1989597392 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer-related cognitive impairment studies
Canadian institutionsBaycrest Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEtiologyChemotherapyCognitionMedicineIntensive care medicinePsychological interventionCognitive impairmentMEDLINEPsychiatrySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chemotherapy has improved survival rates in patients with many of the common cancers. However, there is reliable evidence that, as a result of treatment, a subset of cancer survivors experience cognitive problems that can last for many years after the completion of chemotherapy. The etiology of this phenomenon is largely unknown, and currently there are no proven treatments. This article explores the clinical and preclinical literature on potential therapies for chemotherapy-induced cognitive impairments. Emerging results suggest that both pharmacological and behavioral approaches may offer patients some benefits. However, research in this area has been limited and is sometimes fraught with methodological flaws. As a result, it is difficult to draw definite conclusions regarding treatment efficacy. These issues, along with predictors of cognitive decline, are discussed in the light of possible interventions.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.236
GPT teacher head0.511
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it