The Effect of Cognitive Functions After Chemotherapy on Activity Performance and Social Participation in Breast Cancer Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: Cognitive function problems are among the most common side effects of chemotherapy. Individuals continue to experience cognitive dysfunctions after the treatment end. Individuals who survive breast cancer experience daily life problems as a result of cancer. The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of cognitive functions of individuals with breast cancer on chemotherapy, ending on the activity performance, and activity participation of individuals in daily life. Material and Methods: In the study, 35 women with breast cancer between 18 and 65 years of age and whose chemotherapy was terminated, were included. The Montreal cognitive assessment scale (MOBID) was used to evaluate cognitive functions, the Canadian activity performance scale (KAPÖ) was used to determine activity performance and problem areas, and the disability assessment scale (WHODAS-2) was used to evaluate the activities they had difficulty in participating in. Results: As a result of the evaluations, it was observed that the areas of executive functions, naming, attention, abstract thinking, delayed recall, and orientation were affected in breast cancer individuals whose chemotherapy was terminated. A positive and significant (P < ,05) correlation was found between the cognitive functions affected and the activity performances and satisfaction of the individuals, and a negative and significant (P < ,01) correlation with the activity participation. Conclusion: Cognitive rehabilitation practices are very important for improving the quality of life, supporting participation, and improving the performance of cancer patients after chemotherapy. Cite this article as: Akdemir G, Ünsal E, Tarakcı D, Bilici A, Ölmez FÖ, Yıldız Ö. The effect of cognitive functions after chemotherapy on activity performance and social participation in breast cancer patients. Arch Health Sci Res. 2021;8(3):189-195.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| 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".