ArticleCancers2022
Comparison of Neurocognitive Functioning and Fine Motor Skills in Pediatric Cancer Survivors and Healthy Children.
Article in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Designing oncology-specific patient-reported outcome dashboards: end-user preferences for reference curve inclusion and visualization in pediatric cancer care.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Disease burden and healthcare utilization in pediatric low-grade glioma: A United States retrospective study of linked claims and electronic health records.Neuro-oncology practice · 2024Article
- Effects of cognitive-motor intervention for pediatric posterior fossa tumor survivors: results of a pilot study.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2024Article
- Picture naming test through the prism of cognitive neuroscience and linguistics: adapting the test for cerebellar tumor survivors-or pouring new wine in old sacks?Frontiers in psychology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background: The late treatment outcomes of pediatric brain tumors and of hematopoietic and lymphoid tissue tumors are an important focus of both rehabilitation and research. Neurocognitive and motor disorders induce further learning problems impeding social-emotional adaptation throughout a whole lifespan. Core deficits in short-term and working memory, visuospatial constructional ability, verbal fluency, and fine motor skills underlie distorted intellectual and academic achievement. This study aimed to assess the individual differences in cognitive ability and fine motor skills of pediatric tumor survivors and the age-matched healthy controls. Methods: A total of 504 tumor survivors after treatment and 646 age-matched healthy controls underwent neurocognitive and fine motor assessments. Findings: The group of tumor survivors scored significantly worse in both neurocognitive and fine motor skill in compared with the healthy control group. The pediatric brain tumor survivors (PBT group) performed worse in cognitive (p < 0.001 for verbal fluency and p < 0.001 for visuospatial constructional ability) and motor tests (p < 0.001) compared to the healthy controls. Hematopoietic and Lymphoid Tissues tumors survivors (THL group) performed worse in verbal fluency (p < 0.01) and visuospatial constructional test (p < 0.001) compared to the control group. Furthermore, the PBT group had worse results in visuospatial constructional ability (p < 0.05) and fine motor (p < 0.001) ability than the THL group. Significant differences between females and males were found in fine motor test performance in the PBT group (p < 0.05), as well as in verbal fluency (p < 0.01) and visuospatial constructional ability (p < 0.01) in the control group. Neurocognitive and fine motor skill characteristics in the THL group did not correlate with age.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.