Pretreatment worry and neurocognitive responses in women with breast cancer.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
UNLABELLED: [Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported in Vol 33(3) of Health Psychology (see record 2014-07787-001). The name of author Misook Jung was misspelled as Mi Sook Jung. All versions of this article have been corrected.] OBJECTIVE: Altered cognitive function has been associated with breast cancer treatment, particularly adjuvant chemotherapy, but the underlying neuropsychological mechanisms are not yet understood. Recent research indicates that compromised attention and working memory can exist before adjuvant treatment, implicating psychological distress, such as worry, as a possible contributor to observed alterations in cognitive function. We hypothesized that worry associated with breast cancer diagnosis might influence neurocognitive responses before any adjuvant therapy. DESIGN: Fifty women, 25 due to receive chemotherapy and 25 due to receive radiation therapy, participated in the study. Women performed a verbal working memory task during functional magnetic resonance imaging scanning to assess neurocognitive responses before any adjuvant treatment and to test the relationship of such responses with self-reports of worry. RESULTS: Although prechemotherapy participants showed significantly higher levels of worry compared with preradiation participants, higher worry, across both groups, was related to altered brain function. Specifically, increased worry was associated with reduced demand-related deactivation in default-mode regions, such as the precuneus/posterior cingulate. Reduced demand-related deactivation was critically related to worse behavioral performance, which was partially mediated by worry. CONCLUSION: Worry appears to be a significant contributor to neurocognitive dysfunction independent of adjuvant treatment for breast cancer. These results suggest that alterations in cognitive function may develop before any chemotherapy treatment and that worry about cancer diagnosis may contribute to reports of "chemo brain" during treatment. Psychological interventions aimed at mitigating worry may help to alleviate cognitive dysfunction associated with life-threatening illness such as breast cancer.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".