MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225747980 · doi:10.3389/fonc.2022.869752

The Global Impact of COVID-19 on Childhood Cancer Outcomes and Care Delivery - A Systematic Review

2022· review· en· W4225747980 on OpenAlexaff
Amna Majeed, Tom Wright, Biqi Guo, Ramandeep Singh Arora, Catherine G. Lam, Alexandra Martiniuk

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Oncology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePandemicCancerMEDLINEChildhood cancerGlobal healthDiseaseCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Intensive care medicinePediatricsInternal medicinePathologyPublic healthInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Childhood cancer represents a leading cause of death and disease burden in high income countries (HICs) and low-and-middle income countries (LMICs). It is postulated that the current COVID-19 pandemic has hampered global development of pediatric oncology care programs. This systematic review aimed to comprehensively review the global impact of COVID-19 on childhood cancer clinical outcomes and care delivery. Methods: A systematic search was conducted on PubMed, Embase, Medline, and the African Medical Index from inception to November 3, 2021 following PRISMA guidelines. A manual search was performed to identify additional relevant studies. Articles were selected based on predetermined eligibility criteria. Findings: The majority of studies reported patients with cancer and COVID-19 presenting as asymptomatic (HICs: 33.7%, LMICs: 22.0%) or with primary manifestations of fever (HICs: 36.1%, LMICs: 51.4%) and respiratory symptoms (HICs: 29.6%, LMICs: 11.7%). LMICs also reported a high frequency of patients presenting with cough (23.6%) and gastrointestinal symptoms (10.6%). The majority of patients were generally noted to have a good prognosis; however the crude mortality rate was higher in LMICs when compared to HICs (8.0% vs 1.8%). Moreover, the pandemic has resulted in delays and interruptions to cancer therapies and delays in childhood cancer diagnoses in both HICs and LMICs. However, these findings were disproportionately reported in LMICs, with significant staff shortages, supply chain disruptions, and limited access to cancer therapies for patients. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in delays and interruptions to childhood cancer therapies and delays in childhood cancer diagnoses, and disproportionately so within LMICs. This review provides lessons learned for future system-wide disruptions to care, as well as provides key points for moving forward better with care through the remainder of this pandemic. Systematic Review Registration: CRD42021266758, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=266758.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.007
Bibliometrics0.0100.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.410 · 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 designSystematic review
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

Citations43
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in OncologySame topicCOVID-19 and healthcare impactsFrench-language works237,207