Observational studyBMC cancer2025
Hearing, smell, and cognitive function after cancer treatment.
Observational study in BMC cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study investigates the sensory and cognitive impact of cancer and its treatment, focusing on possible chemotherapy-induced hearing and olfactory impairment, and cognitive function. The primary aim is to evaluate the effectiveness and feasibility of an extended test battery for assessing sensory and cognitive function in cancer patients, providing foundational knowledge for a larger study. A secondary aim is to examine associations between chemotherapy types and sense-neurodegenerative function.
designAn observational cross-sectional, pilot study evaluated hearing, olfactory function, and cognitive function in first-line chemotherapy patients without prior brain injuries and ototoxic or otological histories. Self-reported outcomes on communication strategies, tinnitus and olfaction were collected. Data analysis applied descriptive statistics with t-tests, and Fisher´s exact tests to compare auditory, olfactory, and cognitive performance between treatment groups. STUDY SAMPLE: Thirteen cancer survivors (n = 13), six (n = 6) females and seven (n = 7) males who received two different types of chemotherapy.
resultsNo significant differences were observed between the chemotherapy groups in audiological and olfactory tests, cognitive assessment, or self-reported outcomes. However, among those receiving platinum-based chemotherapy, participants reported greater use of communication strategies in specific areas.
conclusionNo significant differences in hearing, olfactory, cognitive, and self-reported outcomes were found when examining cancer patients receiving two different chemotherapy types. The study highlights the need for advanced diagnostic tools to detect hearing, olfactory, and cognitive function in cancer survivors.
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.