MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4415820293 · doi:10.3390/curroncol32110611

Neurocognitive and Emotional Outcomes in Childhood Cancer: A Developmental Perspective

2025· article· en· W4415820293 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Antonios I. Christou, Georgia D. Kalfadeli, Stella Tsermentseli, Flora Bacopoulou

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeurocognitivePsychosocialPsychological interventionCognitionAnxietyPerspective (graphical)Cognitive remediation therapyRehabilitationPsychological resilience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Childhood cancer survivors (CCSs) are at heightened risk of long-term neurocognitive and emotional difficulties that can affect educational attainment, social participation, and overall quality of life. These outcomes vary across developmental stages and are influenced by treatment modality, age at diagnosis, and central nervous system (CNS) involvement. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO, and Web of Science for articles published between January 2000 and June 2024. Search terms included combinations of "childhood cancer survivors," "neurocognitive outcomes," "executive function," "emotional regulation," and related MeSH terms. Inclusion criteria required peer-reviewed studies assessing CCS using standardized neuropsychological or emotional measures. RESULTS: Evidence indicates persistent deficits in processing speed, working memory, and higher-order executive functions, with additional challenges in attention and memory. Emotional difficulties, including anxiety, depression, and social withdrawal, were prevalent and often co-occurred with cognitive impairments. Developmental timing of cancer and treatment was a key determinant of outcome. Family functioning, school reintegration support, and broader social environments emerged as important moderators of resilience. CONCLUSIONS: CCSs face complex, interrelated cognitive and emotional challenges that warrant early identification and ongoing, developmentally tailored intervention. Integrated approaches combining cognitive remediation and psychosocial support appear most effective. Future research should prioritize longitudinal designs, multi-informant assessments, and culturally sensitive frameworks to inform targeted prevention and rehabilitation strategies. Our synthesis highlights that deficits in processing speed and working memory are most pronounced following CNS-directed therapies during early developmental stages, whereas emotional vulnerabilities such as anxiety and social withdrawal often emerge later in adolescence. Interventions combining cognitive remediation, targeted psychosocial support, and structured school reintegration show the strongest evidence for improving adaptive outcomes. Coordinated survivorship care across healthcare, educational, and family systems is essential to sustain developmental recovery.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.368 · 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Oncology→Same topicChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life→French-language works237,207→