ArticleBrain and behavior2020
The role of metamemory on cognitive complaints in cancer patients.
Article in Brain and behavior, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mapping Cognitive Oncology: A Decade of Trends and Research Fronts.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Investigating the Effects of Discrimination Experiences on Everyday Metamemory Accuracy.The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences · 2024Article
- The role of metamemory on cognitive complaints in cancer patients.Brain and behavior · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveAlthough cancer patients frequently report cognitive disturbances, it is commonly asserted a lack of association between cognitive complaints and neuropsychological test performances. Our goal was to better understand the relationships between subjective and objective cognitive scores through a metamemory monitoring assessment.
methodsSixty cancer patients currently treated by chemotherapy and/or targeted therapy, and 30 healthy controls (HC) were included. Cognitive complaint was assessed by FACT-cog, QAM and DEX questionnaires. One or more z-scores ≤-1.65 among these three questionnaires defined the presence of cognitive complaints. Objective cognitive performances assessed episodic memory, processing speed and executive functions/working memory (ESR paradigm, TMT, Stroop, n-back). Metamemory was assessed with a Judgment of Learning (JOL) task.
resultsPatients with cognitive complaints had significantly more depressive and anxiety symptoms (ps < .004), and lower performances on several cognitive tests (ps < .05) than both patients without complaints and HC. More specifically, analyses of the metamemory scores revealed that HC gave significantly more overestimations ("Yes" judgment and incorrect recall) than patients with cognitive complaints (p = .036). For these patients, JOL scores correlated positively with executive functioning (ps < .01).
conclusionMetamemory monitoring seems to be well-preserved during cancer. What is more, patients make less overestimation than HC, and they do not underestimate their memory. An accurate self-estimation of memory abilities in cancer patients, particularly those with mild cognitive deficits, may play an adaptive function. Our results suggest that the discrepancy frequently reported between cognitive complaints and objective cognitive scores may not be related to metamemory monitoring dysfunction.
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.