Experiences of Cancer-Related Cognitive Impairment Across Cancer Types: Qualitative Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cancer-related cognitive impairment (CRCI) is frequently reported during cancer treatment, with 35% of patients experiencing cognitive issues even after treatment completion. Commonly reported impairments include difficulties with memory, attention, executive function, and processing speed, which often reduce daily functioning and quality of life (QoL). Despite its prevalence, CRCI remains underresearched across various cancer types, limiting understanding of the patient experience. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to synthesize the qualitative evidence regarding the lived experience of CRCI across cancer types. It seeks to do so by exploring how commonly CRCI is subjectively experienced among cancer populations. It also aims to explore the cognitive domains perceived as most affected and the impact on QoL and functional ability. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative systematic review using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) methodology. A comprehensive search across PubMed, APA PsycInfo, CINAHL, and Scopus for studies published from 2013 through July 2025 was performed. Articles addressing the experience of CRCI using qualitative or mixed methods were included. Two independent reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and full texts, with a third reviewer resolving conflicts during the inclusion process. Two reviewers piloted the data extraction process by discussing and selecting 10% of the studies. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist was used for data extraction and quality assessment. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: The database search identified 11,269 papers; 51 were included for analysis. Breast cancer was the most represented cancer type (n=32). The analysis revealed 4 themes. "Cognitive challenges" explores the impacted cognitive domains such as memory, concentration, executive functions, language, and processing speed; "navigating employment" discusses challenges associated with return to work, support, and disclosure; "emotional, behavioral, and psychological impacts" explores emotional and psychological responses; and "support systems" emphasizes the role of social and health care support. CRCI negatively affects QoL and functional ability, and there is lack of understanding and resources in place to manage its effects. CONCLUSIONS: This qualitative systematic review highlights the significant disruption of CRCI in daily life, stressing the need for increased awareness, standardized screening, and further research into digital interventions. Improved management of CRCI can support survivors of cancer in reintegrating into their daily lives and employment. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/56888.
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 | 0.049 | 0.103 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".