QOL-14. IMPACT OF RADIATION DOSE ON PHYSICAL AND EMOTIONAL OUTCOMES IN PEDIATRIC BRAIN TUMOR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pediatric patients with brain tumors often experience disease- and treatment-dependent physical and psychosocial concerns following treatment. The present study evaluated the effect of radiation dose on parent-reported symptoms of pain, physical functioning, and depression following treatment. Mothers and fathers of pediatric patients (n=182; M age = 11.33; SD= 2.25; 47.3% females) diagnosed with a primary brain tumor (M age at diagnosis = 7.39; SD=3.08) completed questionnaires at research visits. Caregivers completed the Child Health Questionnaire and Child Behavioral Checklist to assess children’s physical functioning, pain, and depression symptoms. Chart review was conducted to obtain brain tumor diagnosis, radiation type (whole vs. focal) and radiation dose. Controlling for brain tumor diagnosis, age, and gender linear regressions revealed moderate and high doses of whole brain radiation were significantly related to decreased parent-reported physical functioning (β = -0.354, p < .01). Increased dosage of focal radiation was significantly related to decreased physical functioning (β = -0.191, p < .05) and increased withdrawal/depression (β = 0.189, p < .05). Present results suggest increased radiation dosage is related to children’s mental and physical wellbeing three to four years following treatment. This study adds to existent literature documenting detrimental effects of radiation on neurocognitive outcomes in pediatric brain tumor survivors. Future research on treatment factors related to quality of life are warranted, along with continued research on interventions designed to decrease the negative impact of brain tumor treatment on children’s long-term quality of life.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".