Neuropsychological outcomes following pediatric lung transplantation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Lung transplantation (LTx) is a treatment option for eligible children with end-stage pulmonary diseases. Improving our understanding of longer-term developmental outcomes in pediatric LTx recipients is important for strategized interventions targeting cognitive difficulties. METHODS: Neuropsychological assessments were completed for children who received LTx at our center (2009-2017). Assessments comprised tasks of general intellect, memory, visual-perception, academics, and executive functioning as well as caregiver questionnaires of adaptive, executive, emotional, and behavioral functioning. Results were compared to age-matched population norms. Between-group nonparametric tests were performed pre-LTx vs post-LTx and for children with a primary diagnosis of cystic fibrosis (CF) vs other diagnoses (non-CF). RESULTS: Neuropsychological outcomes were assessed for 21 children post-LTx, with a median age (interquartile range) at the time of transplant of 11.52 (6.89, 14.12) years. Eleven children completed pre- and post-transplant assessments and within this group, improvements for verbal learning (P = .02), aspects of mood, behavior, and adaptive functioning were observed over time (all P < .05). Post-transplant whole group analysis suggested age-appropriate abilities across most cognitive domains, with a relative weakness for executive functioning. Emotional or behavioral difficulties were not endorsed by caregivers. Across pulmonary diagnoses, higher levels of emotional, behavioral, and executive functioning difficulty were reported in the non-CF group (all P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, LTx has a positive impact on cognitive functioning, particularly learning, adaptive functioning, mood, and behavior. Children transplanted for non-CF related diseases demonstrated greater challenges, highlighting the need for targeted assessments and interventions across the transplant process to support the complex needs of this 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".