Social determinants of health and neurocognitive and psychosocial outcomes in adult childhood cancer survivors: A report from the childhood cancer survivor study (CCSS).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
12084 Background: Limited data exist on the impact of social determinants of health on neurocognitive, psychological, and quality of life (QOL) outcomes in adult childhood cancer survivors. Methods: We examined patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of neurocognitive function, psychological symptoms, and QOL in association with the Area Deprivation Index (ADI) and neighborhood ambient air quality in 5,131 survivors (52.1% female, mean [SD] age 29.9 [7.1], mean [SD] age at diagnosis 7.9 [6.2], 81.5% White, and 42.3% leukemia) from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study. The ADI, which reflects neighborhood socioeconomic deprivation, was coded using survivors’ residential 9-digit ZIP codes; neighborhood ambient air quality was coded by the NASA Satellite-based pollution measures PM2.5 and NO2 by ZIP codes. Impairment on PROs was identified from scores on the Neurocognitive Questionnaire (≤10th%ile), the Brief Symptoms Inventory (BSI; ≥90th%ile), the pain survey (yes vs. no), and the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 ( < 16th%ile). Multivariable logistic regression assessed associations between social determinants and PROs with odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), adjusting for demographic and treatment (chemotherapy and radiation) factors. Results: Among survivors, impaired neurocognitive function was reported in 26.5% for task efficiency, 25.4% memory, 15.4% emotional regulation, and 11.6% organization. For the BSI and pain survey, 56.7%, 11.3%, 8.3%, and 7.3% reported total pain, depression, somatization, and anxiety, respectively. Poor physical and mental domains of QOL were reported by 10.9% and 17.0% of survivors, respectively. Survivors with an ADI in the top deprived 20% neighborhoods (compared to the bottom 80% neighborhoods) reported worse neurocognitive function (task efficiency, OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.45-2.46; emotional regulation, OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.30-2.34; and memory, OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.29-2.17), more severe symptoms (pain, OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.05-1.70; somatization, OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.05-2.28; and depression, OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.19-2.44), and poorer QOL (physical, OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.28-2.38; mental, OR 1.79, 95% CI 1.35-2.36), controlling for treatment factors. Survivors from the 20% most deprived neighborhoods showed worse task efficiency (OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.03-2.17), adjusting for all confounders. PM2.5 and NO2 levels were not associated with impairment on PROs, adjusting for all confounders. Conclusions: Social determinants, particularly living in the top deprived neighborhoods, are adversely associated with neurocognitive, psychological, and QOL outcomes in adult childhood cancer survivors. These findings indicate the critical need of evaluating childhood cancer survivors’ area-level deprivation and tailoring support and interventions for survivors based on their social and structural contexts.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".