Cardiorespiratory fitness and health-related quality of life in survivors of childhood central nervous system tumours
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: We assessed cardiorespiratory fitness and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in survivors of childhood central nervous system (CNS) tumours. METHODS: Participants were recruited from the National Children's Cancer Service in Children's Health Ireland at Crumlin. Inclusion criteria included diagnosis of a primary CNS tumour, aged between 6 and 17 years, between 3 months and 5 years post completion of oncology treatment, independently mobile, and deemed clinically appropriate to participate by treating oncologist. Cardiorespiratory fitness was assessed using the six-minute walk test. HRQoL was assessed with the PedsQL Generic Core Scales, Version 4.0. RESULTS: percentile overall. 6MWD was significantly reduced when compared to predicted population norms (p < 0.001). PedsQL parent proxy-report and child-report scores were significantly lower when compared to healthy paediatric norms (p < 0.001 - p = 0.011). A significant positive correlation was found between 6MWD and both parent proxy-report (r = 0.55, p < 0.001) and child-report (r = 0.48, p = 0.005) PedsQL total scores. CONCLUSION: Survivors of childhood CNS tumours present with impaired cardiorespiratory fitness and HRQoL. Higher levels of cardiorespiratory fitness are associated with higher levels of HRQoL. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Routine screening of cardiorespiratory fitness and HRQoL in survivors of childhood CNS tumours may be beneficial. Healthcare providers should encourage and provide education on the potential benefits of physical activity to improve overall quality of life.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".