Health-Related Quality of Life of Adolescent and Young Adult-Aged Childhood Cancer Survivors in a South African Cohort: A Pilot Study Using the Minneapolis-Manchester Quality of Life Instrument
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: We investigated the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of an adolescent and young adult (AYA)-aged South African childhood cancer survivor (CCS) cohort. Methods: Participants completed the Minneapolis-Manchester Quality of Life adolescent and adult forms. The overall Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were 0.81 (adolescent form) and 0.92 (adult form). The scale-level content validity indexes were acceptable (0.88 and 0.89 for the adolescent and adult forms, respectively). The total domain and overall HRQoL scores were calculated. Results: Sixty-two survivors completed the adolescent form and 30 completed the adult form. The median age was 17.5 years (range 13–34 years), and the median time from diagnosis was 12 years (male:female ratio 1:1.2). Risk factors for poor physical functioning included age at study visit ( p = 0.015), solid tumor diagnosis ( p = 0.012), radiotherapy ( p = 0.021), and surgery ( p = 0.006). Six or more late effects impacted most domains negatively; severe late effects ( p = 0.020) decreased physical functioning. Lower socioeconomic status was associated with poorer physical ( p = 0.006) and cognitive ( p = 0.047) functioning. The adult form cohort had poorer psychological ( p = 0.014) and social functioning ( p = 0.005) and body image ( p = 0.016) than the adolescent form cohort. Conclusion: Older age, radiotherapy, surgery, solid tumor diagnosis, and the number and severity of late effects negatively influenced HRQoL in AYA-aged CCSs. A long-term follow-up (LTFU) risk stratification system should include HRQoL status to assist with holistic LTFU 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".