SynthesisJournal of the National Cancer Institute2019
Understanding the Profile of Cancer-Related Cognitive Impairments: A Critique of Meta-Analyses.
Synthesis in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Neurocognitive Effects of Chemotherapy for Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and a Meta-Analysis of 11 Studies.Cancer research and treatment · 2021Pooled it
- Trial
- Cancer treatment-related cognitive impairment.Neuro-oncology advances · 2026Review
- Development and Preliminary Psychometric Evaluation of the ACRIS-CS: A Theory-Based Measure of Prospective Acceptability of Cognitive Rehabilitation in Cancer Survivors.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Advances in neuroimaging in cancer-related cognitive impairment.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Review
- Article
- Modifying modularity: aerobic exercise improves functional connectivity in breast cancer survivors.Frontiers in cognition · 2024Article
- Article
- CanCOGHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Can neuropsychological testing be improved with model-based approaches?Trends in cognitive sciences · 2022Article
- Article
- Screening recall in older cancer survivors detects differences in balance and mobility.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022Article
- Cancer-related cognitive impairment is associated with perturbations in inflammatory pathways.Cytokine · 2021Article
- How do we measure attention? Using factor analysis to establish construct validity of neuropsychological tests.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2021Article
- Prevalence of cognitive impairment and its relation to mental health in Danish lymphoma survivors.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021Article
- Protective Effects ofJNCI cancer spectrum · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A large body of evidence indicates that cancer survivors who have undergone chemotherapy have cognitive impairments. Substantial disagreement exists regarding which cognitive domains are impaired in this population. We suggest that is in part due to inconsistency in how neuropsychological tests are assigned to cognitive domains. The purpose of this paper is to critically analyze the meta-analytic literature on cancer-related cognitive impairments (CRCI) to quantify this inconsistency. We identified all neuropsychological tests reported in seven meta-analyses of the CRCI literature. Although effect sizes were generally negative (indicating impairment), every domain was declared to be impaired in at least one meta-analysis and unimpaired in at least one other meta-analysis. We plotted summary effect sizes from all the meta-analyses and quantified disagreement by computing the observed and ideal distributions of the one-way χ2 statistic. The actual χ2 distributions were noticeably more peaked and shifted to the left than the ideal distributions, indicating substantial disagreement among the meta-analyses in how neuropsychological tests were categorized to domains. A better understanding of the profile of impairments in CRCI is essential for developing effective remediation methods. To accomplish this goal, the research field needs to promote better agreement on how to measure specific cognitive functions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.