Prevalence and associated factors of chemotherapy‐related cognitive impairment in older breast cancer survivors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To examine the prevalence and associated factors of chemotherapy-related cognitive impairment (CRCI) in older breast cancer survivors (BCS). DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: We searched EMBASE, PubMed, PsychInfo, CINAHL, Cochrance Library, Web of Science, CNKI and SinoMed, without language restrictions, for studies published from the establishment of the database to September 2022. REVIEW METHODS: Two researchers independently examined the full texts, data extraction and quality assessment, and any discrepancies were resolved through discussion with a third reviewer. Quality of evidence was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Scale. RESULTS: The seven included studies showed that the estimated prevalence of CRCI in older BCS ranged from 18.6% to 27% on objective neuropsychological tests and from 7.6% to 49% on subjective cognitive assessments. The areas most affected were attention, memory, executive functioning and processing speed. CRCI was associated with 10 factors in six categories, including sociodemographic (e.g. age, education level), physiological (e.g. sleep disorders, fatigue and comorbidities), psychological (e.g. anxiety, depression), treatment modalities (e.g. chemotherapy cycles, chemotherapy regimens), genetic (e.g. APOE2, APOE4) and lifestyle factor (e.g. physical inactivity). CONCLUSION: CRCI is multifactorial and has a relatively high prevalence. However, the results of subjective and objective cognitive examinations were inconsistent, possibly due to variations in tools used to evaluate different definitions of CRCI. Nevertheless, as there are few published studies of older BCS, this conclusion still require verification by well-designed studies in the future. IMPACT: We found that the prevalence of CRCI in older adults is relatively high and multifactorial, providing evidence for further health care for this population. NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: There was no patient or public involvement.
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 | 0.006 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".