MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285232941 · doi:10.4236/ojim.2022.122015

Cognitive Impairment Related to Chemotherapy in 60 Patients with Advanced Gastric Cancer

2022· article· en· W4285232941 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yingxing Cheng, Lijuan Zhang, Hong Zheng, Xiao-Juan Jiang, Yong Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Journal of Internal Medicine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer-related cognitive impairment studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBengbu Medical College
KeywordsCapecitabineMedicineCancerChemotherapyInternal medicineMontreal Cognitive AssessmentVerbal learningCognitionOncologyBreast cancerCognitive impairmentColorectal cancerPsychiatryDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Gastric cancer is one of the most common malignant tumors in the world. In recent years, studies on chemotherapy-induced cognitive impairment have been reported mainly on young women with breast cancer. Only few studies on chemotherapy-related cognitive impairment in patients with gastric cancer. Objective: To investigate the effect of chemotherapy on cognitive function in patients with advanced gastric cancer. Methods: Sixty patients with stage IV gastric cancer who received fluorouracil based chemotherapy were selected as gastric cancer group, including 25 patients with S-1 (S-1 group) and 35 patients with capecitabine (capecitabine group). 60 healthy controls matched with age and education level were recruited as control group. Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Auditory Verbal Learning Test (AVLT) were used to test. Results: There was no significant difference in MMSE, MoCA and AVLT between healthy control group and gastric cancer group before chemotherapy. MMSE, MoCA, immediate memory and delayed memory decreased in gastric cancer patients after chemotherapy (t = 2.206, t = 2.399, t = 2.206, t = 2.654, P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in MMSE, MoCA and AVLT between S-1 group and capecitabine group before and after chemotherapy. Conclusion: Patients with gastric cancer will have chemotherapy-related cognitive dysfunction after chemotherapy. It is necessary to evaluate and guide or treat patients with cognitive function, so as to improve the quality of life of patients.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Journal of Internal MedicineSame topicCancer-related cognitive impairment studiesFrench-language works237,207