Performance monitoring in lung cancer patients pre- and post-chemotherapy using fine-grained electrophysiological measures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
No previous event-related potentials (ERPs) study has explored the error-related negativity (ERN) - an ERP component indexing performance monitoring - associated to cancer and chemotherapy-induced cognitive impairment in a lung cancer population. The aim of this study was to examine differences in performance monitoring in a small-cell lung cancer group (SCLC, C +) 1-month following chemotherapy and two control groups: a non-small cell lung cancer patient group (NSCLC, C -) prior to chemotherapy and a healthy control group (HC). Seventeen SCLC (C +) underwent a neuropsychological assessment and an ERP study using a flanker and a stop-signal paradigm. This group was compared to fifteen age-, gender- and education-matched NSCLC (C -) and eighteen HC. Between 20 and 30% of patients in both lung cancer groups (C + and C -) met criteria for cognitive impairment. Concerning ERPs, lung cancer patients showed lower overall hit rate and a severe ERN amplitude reduction compared to HC. Lung cancer patients exhibited an abnormal pattern of performance monitoring thus suggesting that chemotherapy and especially cancer itself, may contribute to cognitive deterioration. ERN appeared as an objective laboratory tool sensitive to cognitive dysfunction in cancer population.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".