ArticleNeuro-oncology practice2026
Cognitive function in long-term survivors after treatment for brain metastases compared with normative samples.
Article in Neuro-oncology practice, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Living with brain metastases-A longitudinal qualitative study of patient experiences from time of diagnosis.Neuro-oncology practice · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Few studies have examined cognitive function in long-term survivors with brain metastases (BM). The aim of this study was to assess performance-based cognitive function and compare it with normative samples. Methods: Patients with ≥2-year survival after a first-time BM diagnosis completed neuropsychological tests assessing the following neurocognitive domains: processing speed, executive functioning, mental flexibility, visual learning and memory, verbal learning and memory, attention, and working memory. Test scores were converted into standardized Results: Forty-one patients (median age 58, 24 women) completed assessments at a median of 32 months (min-max: 26-47) after the BM diagnosis. On a group level, patients performed poorer than normative samples in tests within all domains except verbal learning and memory. The deviation was most pronounced in a subtest assessing mental flexibility. The proportion of patients with subclinical or clinically significant impairment ranged from 29% to 59% and 7% to 51% between domains, respectively. Seventy-three percent had at least subclinical and 59% had clinically significant impairment in at least 1 domain. Conclusions: Long-term survivors with BM performed poorer than normative samples within nearly all neurocognitive domains, particularly executive functioning and mental flexibility. This domain is important for daily living and social functioning, and clinicians should provide information about the implications of BM and tailor patient care to optimize functioning and quality of life.
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.