Disability and Health-related Quality of Life in Long-term Survivors of Cancer in Childhood in Brazil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is limited experience with patient-reported measurements of health status and health-related quality of life (HRQL) in survivors of cancer in childhood in low-income countries. The purposes of this study were to collect such measurements in Brazil, to test hypotheses about differences among diagnostic groups, and to compare results with those from other countries. Survivors were eligible if diagnosed with cancer in childhood, attending a long-term follow-up clinic, cancer free, literate, and at least 13 years of age. Health status measurements were collected using a Brazilian Portuguese Health Utilities Index questionnaire. Questionnaire responses were converted to scores for morbidity in individual health attributes and for overall HRQL. More than one-third of the 138 consecutive survivors who participated reported some cognitive disability or pain. Approximately one-quarter reported problems with vision, speech, or emotion. Mean HRQL was similar (P>0.05) among countries for survivors of acute lymphoblastic leukemia and Hodgkin disease. The results support the hypotheses that Brazilian survivors of cancer in childhood experience a wide range of disabilities and impaired HRQL, are similar to those in other countries, and should be assessed in long-term follow-up clinics.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".