Neuropsychological outcomes on Head Start III: a prospective, multi-institutional clinical trial for young children diagnosed with malignant brain tumors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Current pediatric brain tumor treatment focuses on titrating toxicity based on risk factors while simultaneously improving survivorship. The Head Start (HS) protocols I to IV (1991-present) use high-dose chemotherapy (HDCTx) with an aim of reducing or eliminating cranial irradiation in very young children, the most vulnerable to its effects. METHODS: We examined estimated Full Scale IQ, overall Adaptive Functioning, Working Memory, Processing Speed, and Verbal and Nonverbal Memory outcome data for 43 HS III patients diagnosed between ages 2 months and 7 years from 15 institutions in the United States and Canada. RESULTS: At a mean of 5.12 years postdiagnosis, the HS III patients performed within the average to low-average ranges across these variables; however, individual variability was noted with scores ranging from superior to impaired, and the sample as a whole performed lower than age expectations. Performance did not significantly differ by sex or ethnicity, diagnosis, or for those treated with an intravenous methotrexate dose of 400 mg/kg vs 270 mg/kg. Additionally, performance did not significantly differ by age at diagnosis or length of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The results, indicating overall average to low-average neurocognitive functioning, are encouraging, though significant individual variability was noted. Those who were younger at diagnosis, received more intensive methotrexate, and were further out from treatment were not at significantly increased risk of cognitive decline within our sample, suggesting a strategy of using HDCTx and autologous hematopoietic progenitor cell rescue to reduce or eliminate irradiation may allow for continued CNS development in young children treated for a brain tumor.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".