The Impact of Chemotherapy-Induced Cognitive Impairment on the Psychosocial Adjustment of Patients With Nonmetastatic Colorectal Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Colorectal cancer is the third most commonly diagnosed cancer in Canada. Chemotherapy often is used as treatment for colorectal cancer, and studies have documented cognitive changes in patients after chemotherapy treatment. What remains unclear is the impact of such changes on a person's roles and relationships, herein referred to as psychosocial adjustment. The purpose of this research was to explore group differences in psychosocial adjustment and chemotherapy-induced cognitive impairment in patients with colorectal cancer. Participants were assessed cross-sectionally, at various time points along their treatment trajectory, using the Psychosocial Adjustment to Illness Scale-Self-Report (PAIS-SR) and the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB). A statistically nonsignificant negative association was indicated between PAIS-SR and CANTAB results, indicating that they would have no meaning in a clinical context. No differences between groups were observed in terms of cognitive ability; however, patients who completed chemotherapy appeared to be at a higher risk for psychosocial maladjustment. This study suggests that cognitive changes do not influence patients' relationships and functional roles, as indicated from the PAIS-SR.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".