Taste changes in paediatric oncology: longitudinal evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Changes in taste is a common symptom in paediatric patients receiving cancer therapies. The primary objective was to describe the prevalence of taste changes longitudinally over a 6-month time frame among paediatric patients with newly diagnosed cancer. Secondary objective was to identify factors associated with taste changes over time. METHODS: In this longitudinal, single centre study, we included paediatric patients newly diagnosed with cancer within the previous 8 weeks who were 4-18 years of age. Interviews were conducted once monthly for 6 months. We asked participants about their experience with taste changes, whether potential interventions were successful and whether taste changes influenced eating. Risk factors were evaluated using generalised linear mixed-effects models. RESULTS: Overall, 60 participants were included. At baseline, 23 (38.3%) participants reported experiencing changes in taste, with the proportion significantly declining over time to 13 (21.7%) at 6 months. The most common specific taste changes were food tasting different, bad or bland. The most common helpful strategies were eating liked foods only, brushing teeth or using mouthwash, drinking more liquids and eating food with strong flavour. Taste change was commonly associated with eating less than usual and reduced enjoyment in eating. Nausea, dry mouth and recent vincristine were independent risk factors for taste changes. CONCLUSIONS: Changes in taste were common within 8 weeks of cancer diagnosis and declined significantly over time. Nausea, dry mouth and recent vincristine were independent risk factors. Future studies should develop and evaluate interventions for managing taste changes in paediatric patients with cancer.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".