MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4298146162 · doi:10.3390/cancers14194752

Episodic Memory and Recollection Network Disruptions Following Chemotherapy Treatment in Breast Cancer Survivors: A Review of Neuroimaging Findings

2022· review· en· W4298146162 on OpenAlexafffund
Meenakshie Bradley-Garcia, Gordon Winocur, Melanie J. Sekeres

Bibliographic record

VenueCancers · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer-related cognitive impairment studies
Canadian institutionsTrent UniversityBaycrest HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsEpisodic memoryRecallBreast cancerAutobiographical memoryCognitionMemory impairmentPsychologyNeuroimagingCancerMedicineCognitive psychologyPsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Long-term memory disturbances are amongst the most common and disruptive cognitive symptoms experienced by breast cancer survivors following chemotherapy. To date, most clinical assessments of long-term memory dysfunction in breast cancer survivors have utilized basic verbal and visual memory tasks that do not capture the complexities of everyday event memories. Complex event memories, including episodic memory and autobiographical memory, critically rely on hippocampal processing for encoding and retrieval. Systemic chemotherapy treatments used in breast cancer commonly cause neurotoxicity within the hippocampus, thereby creating a vulnerability to memory impairment. We review structural and functional neuroimaging studies that have identified disruptions in the recollection network and related episodic memory impairments in chemotherapy-treated breast cancer survivors, and argue for the need to better characterize hippocampally mediated memory dysfunction following chemotherapy treatments. Given the importance of autobiographical memory for a person's sense of identity, ability to plan for the future, and general functioning, under-appreciation of how this type of memory is impacted by cancer treatment can lead to overlooking or minimizing the negative experiences of breast cancer survivors, and neglecting a cognitive domain that may benefit from intervention strategies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancersSame topicCancer-related cognitive impairment studiesFrench-language works237,207