Neurocognitive status in long-term survivors of childhood CNS malignancies: A report from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To assess neurocognitive functioning in adult survivors of childhood Central Nervous System (CNS) malignancy, a large group of CNS malignancy survivors were compared to survivors of non-CNS malignancy and siblings without cancer on a self-report instrument (CCSS-NCQ) assessing four factors, Task Efficiency, Emotional Regulation, Organization and Memory. Additional multiple linear regressions were used to assess the contribution of demographic, illness, and treatment variables to reported neurocognitive functioning in CNS malignancy survivors and the relationship of reported neurocognitive functioning to socioeconomic indicators. Survivors of CNS malignancy reported significantly greater neurocognitive impairment on all CCSS-NCQ factors than non-CNS cancer survivors or siblings (p < .01). Within the CNS malignancy group, medical complications (hearing deficits, paralysis and cerebrovascular incidents) resulted in a greater likelihood of reported deficits on all CCSS-NCQ factors. Total or partial brain irradiation and ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunt placement was associated with greater impairment on Task Efficiency and Memory. Female gender was associated with a greater likelihood of impaired scores on Task Efficiency and Emotional Regulation, while diagnosis before age 2 years resulted in less likelihood of reported impairment on the Memory factor. CNS malignancy survivors with more impaired CCSS-NCQ scores demonstrated significantly lower educational attainment (p < .01), less household income (p < .001), less full time employment (p < .001), and fewer marriages (p < .001). Survivors of childhood CNS malignancy were found to be at significant risk for neurocognitive impairment that continues to adulthood and is correlated with lower socioeconomic achievement.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".