Auditory complications among childhood cancer survivors and health-related quality of life: a PanCareLIFE study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Auditory complications are potential side effects from childhood cancer treatment. Yet, limited evidence exists about the impact of auditory complications-particularly tinnitus-on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among childhood cancer survivors (CCS). We determined the prevalence of hearing loss and tinnitus in the European PanCareLIFE cohort of CCS and examined its effect on HRQoL. METHODS: We included CCS from four European countries who were diagnosed at age ≤ 18 years; survived ≥ 5 years; and aged 25-44 years at study. We assessed HRQoL (Short Form 36), hearing loss, and tinnitus using questionnaires. We used multivariable linear regression to examine associations between these two auditory complications and HRQoL adjusting for socio-demographic and clinical factors. RESULTS: Our study population consisted of 6,318 CCS (53% female; median age at cancer diagnosis 9 years interquartile range [IQR] 5-13 years) with median age at survey of 31 years (IQR 28-35 years). Prevalence was 7.5% (476/6,318; confidence interval [CI]: 6.9-8.2) for hearing loss and 7.6% (127/1,668; CI: 6.4-9.0) for tinnitus. CCS with hearing loss had impaired physical (coefficient [coef.] -4.3, CI: -7.0 to -1.6) and mental (coef. -3.2, CI: -5.5 to -0.8) HRQoL when compared with CCS with normal hearing. Tinnitus was associated with impaired physical (coef. -8.2, CI: -11.8 to -4.7) and mental (coef. -5.9, CI: -8.8 to -3.1) HRQoL. CONCLUSION: We observed reduced HRQoL among CCS with hearing loss and tinnitus. Our findings indicate timely treatment of hearing loss and tinnitus may contribute to quality of life of survivors. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: CCS who experience auditory complications should be counseled about possible therapeutic and supportive measures during follow-up care.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".