MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220956440 · doi:10.3390/children9040447

Long-Term Follow-Up of Pediatric CNS Tumor Survivors—A Selection of Relevant Long-Term Issues

2022· review· en· W4220956440 on OpenAlexaff
Maria Otth, Johanna Wyss, Katrin Scheinemann

Bibliographic record

VenueChildren · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychosocialMedicineQuality of life (healthcare)Intensive care medicineMultidisciplinary approachEndocrine systemInternal medicinePsychiatryNursingHormone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Survivors of pediatric central nervous system (CNS) tumors are at high risk for late effects and long-term morbidity. The quality of survival became increasingly important, as advances in diagnostics, multimodal treatment strategies, and supportive care have led to significant increases in long-term survival. Aim: This review aims to provide a global overview of the potential late effects and long-term follow-up care of CNS tumor survivors, directed to trainees and practitioners with less targeted training in pediatric oncology. Late effects in CNS tumor survivors: A specific focus on CNS tumor survivors relies on cognitive and psychosocial late effects, as they may have an impact on education, professional career, independent living, and quality of life. Further important late effects in CNS tumor survivors include endocrine, metabolic, cardiovascular, and cerebrovascular diseases. Conclusions: Comprehensive long-term follow-up care is essential for pediatric CNS tumor survivors to improve their quality of survival and quality of life. An individualized approach, taking all potential late effects into account, and carried out by an interdisciplinary team, is recommended, and should continue into adulthood. Existing recommendations and guidelines on long-term follow-up care guide the multidisciplinary teams.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.302 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChildrenSame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207