MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2767695428 · doi:10.1093/neuonc/nox168.562

NCOG-01. PATIENT-REPORTED COGNITIVE CONCERNS AND QUALITY OF LIFE IN BRAIN METASTASES

2017· article· en· W2767695428 on OpenAlexaff
Nadine Richard, David Shultz, Normand Laperrière, Alejandro Berlín, Tatiana Conrad, Barbara‐Ann Millar, Mark Bernstein, Paul Kongkham, Gelareh Zadeh, Kim Edelstein

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBrain Metastases and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkToronto Western HospitalPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCognitionAnxietyQuality of life (healthcare)Depression (economics)DistressMedicineIntrusivenessClinical psychologyExecutive functionsPsychiatryPsychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While treatment options for brain metastases continue to evolve, prognosis remains poor for morbidity and survival. Quality of life (QOL) is increasingly emphasized and assessed via patient-reported outcomes. Although studies show most patients are cognitively impaired on objective testing, few have explored patients’ subjective cognitive concerns in relation to other aspects of QOL. A cross-sectional sample of brain metastasis patients completed measures assessing subjective cognitive functioning in multiple domains as well as functional limitations, illness intrusiveness (i.e., interference in valued activities and relationships), existential distress, anxiety and depression. Seventy patients completed the survey; 40% were treated with SRS alone, 19% with WBRT±SRS, 7% with surgery and/or focal radiation only, and 34% had not yet received CNS-directed therapy. Patients ranged in age from 31-87; 64% were female. Prevalence of self-reported cognitive impairments varied by domain, with attention and processing speed most common (19% of patients each), followed by executive, memory and language functions (14, 11 and 9%). These cognitive concerns did not relate to patients’ age or differ by sex, but were associated with symptoms of anxiety (r’s = 0.365 to 0.527, p’s < .005), depression (r’s = 0.508 to 0.650, p’s < .001), existential distress (r’s = 0.338 to 0.541, p’s < .01) and illness intrusiveness (r’s = 0.333 to 0.442, p’s < .05). Processing speed and attentional deficits were additionally linked to limitations in instrumental activities (r’s = 0.262 and 0.272, p’s < .05). Patients who had undergone surgery and/or focal radiation reported greater cognitive impairment than other CNS treatment groups. Results show a significant association between brain metastasis patients’ subjective cognitive concerns and QOL, and an effect of CNS treatment on patient-reported cognitive outcomes. These data may be used to develop supportive care initiatives for brain metastasis patients.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.182
Threshold uncertainty score0.622

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-OncologySame topicBrain Metastases and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207