MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416414969 · doi:10.1002/cam4.71394

Association Between Sensorineural Hearing Loss and Neurocognitive Performance in Survivors of Childhood Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

2025· article· en· W4416414969 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jennifer Schlak, Tripti Shukla, Anne Eaton, Lindsay Blake, Alicia Kunin‐Batson, Ellen van der Plas

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthArkansas Children’s Hospital Research Institute
KeywordsNeurocognitiveAssociation (psychology)Hearing lossSensorineural hearing lossMEDLINECognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Various studies have shown that sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) is associated with neurocognitive impairment among childhood cancer survivors, though prior studies are limited by small sample sizes and inconsistent methods. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to quantify neurocognitive differences between survivors with severe SNHL (s-SNHL) and those without. METHODS: Studies were included if they evaluated childhood cancer survivors (diagnosed ≤ 21 years), were ≥ 2 years posttreatment, received cranial radiation and/or platinum-based chemotherapy, used validated neurocognitive tests, and included survivors with and without SNHL. Methods and reporting adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Databases searched included PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane, Scopus, PsycINFO, and Embase. Study quality was assessed using an adapted version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We collected study details, including authors, year, neurocognitive tests used, sample sizes, and group scores (means and standard deviations [SD]). Pooled mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated using standard scores (mean = 100, SD = 15) and random-effects models. RESULTS: Of 1012 records identified, nine studies were included in the analyses, with 503 childhood cancer survivors with s-SNHL and 1553 survivors without s-SNHL. Compared to survivors without s-SNHL, survivors with s-SNHL scored lower on measures of overall intellectual functioning (MD = -8.1, 95% CI = -10.0, -6.2), verbal reasoning (MD = -9.7, 95% CI = -11.4, -7.9), perceptual reasoning (MD = -6.6, 95% CI = -11.1, -2.1), working memory (MD = -5.3, 95% CI = -7.1, -3.4), processing speed (MD = -6.3, 95% CI = -9.9, -2.6), short-term visual memory (MD = -6.0, 95% CI = -8.2, -3.7), and reading (MD = -6.2, 95% CI = -7.9, -4.5). CONCLUSIONS: Severe SNHL is associated with significant neurocognitive deficits in childhood cancer survivors. Routine hearing screening and timely neurocognitive assessments are recommended to identify and address these impairments. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: CRD42023440952.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0160.035
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer MedicineSame topicHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, GeneticsFrench-language works237,207