MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391925003 · doi:10.1002/cncr.35236

Risk factors for neurocognitive impairment, emotional distress, and poor quality of life in survivors of pediatric rhabdomyosarcoma: A report from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study

2024· article· en· W4391925003 on OpenAlexaff
Ellen van der Plas, Himani Darji, Deo Kumar Srivastava, Melissa Schapiro, Donna B. Jeffe, Stephanie M. Perkins, Rebecca M. Howell, Wendy M. Leisenring, Gregory T. Armstrong, Kevin C. Oeffinger, Kevin R. Krull, Kim Edelstein, Robert J. Hayashi

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
FundersNational Cancer InstituteAmerican Lebanese Syrian Associated CharitiesSt. Jude Children's Research Hospital
KeywordsMedicineNeurocognitiveAnxietyOdds ratioQuality of life (healthcare)Depression (economics)Confidence intervalInternal medicinePsychiatryCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Prevalence and risk of poor psychological outcomes following rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) are not well-established. METHODS: Participants in this cross-sectional, case-control study (n = 713 survivors, 42.5% female; mean [SD] age, 30.5 [6.6] years; n = 706 siblings, 57.2% female; mean age, 32.8,[7.9] years) completed measures of neurocognition, emotional distress, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Multivariable logistic regression models identified treatments, health behaviors, and chronic conditions associated with impairment. RESULTS: Relative to siblings, more survivors reported neurocognitive impairment (task efficiency: 21.1% vs. 13.7%, emotional regulation: 16.7% vs. 11.0%, memory: 19.3% vs. 15.1%), elevated emotional distress (somatic distress: 12.9% vs. 4.7%, anxiety: 11.7% vs. 5.9%, depression: 22.8% vs. 16.9%) and poorer HRQOL (physical functioning: 11.1% vs. 2.8%, role functioning due to physical problems: 16.8% vs. 8.2%, pain: 17.5% vs. 10.0%, vitality: 22.3% vs. 13.8%, social functioning: 14.4% vs. 6.8%, emotional functioning: 17.1% vs. 10.6%). Cranial radiation increased risk for impaired task efficiency (odds ratio [OR], 2.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14-4.63), whereas chest and pelvic radiation predicted increased risk of physical functioning (OR, 2.68; 95% CI, 1.16-6.21 and OR, 3.44; 95% CI, 1.70-6.95, respectively). Smoking was associated with impaired task efficiency (OR, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.14-3.70), memory (OR, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.26-3.95), anxiety (OR, 2.71; 95% CI, 1.36-5.41) and depression (OR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.01-3.11). Neurologic conditions increased risk of anxiety (OR, 2.30; 95% CI, 1.04-5.10), and hearing conditions increased risk of depression (OR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.05-3.03). Neurologic and hearing conditions, respectively, were associated with impaired memory (OR, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.20-4.95 and OR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.05-3.35) and poor health perception (OR, 2.62; 95% CI, 1.62-1.28 and OR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.34-4.06). CONCLUSIONS: RMS survivors are at significant risk for poor psychological outcomes. Advancing therapies for local control, smoking cessation, and managing chronic medical conditions may mitigate poor outcomes following RMS.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.312 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancerSame topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of LifeFrench-language works237,207