Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 374

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Childhood Cancer Survivors' Knowledge About Their Past Diagnosis and Treatment: Childhood Cancer Survivor Study

Kadan-Lottick, Nina S., Robison, Leslie L., Gurney, James G., Neglia, Joseph P., Yasui, Yutaka, Hayashi, Robert, Hudson, Melissa, Greenberg, Mark, Mertens, Ann C.·2002·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: Adult survivors of childhood cancer are at risk for adverse effects later in life but may have limited access to information about their diagnosis and treatment. This knowledge is necessary to motivate them to seek medical follow-up and to report essential history to health care professionals. OBJECTIVE: To assess knowledge of adult survivors of childhood cancer about their primary cancer diagnosis and associated therapies. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional survey of 635 consecutive survivors (approximately 5%) drawn from 12 156 participants 18 years or older participating in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (a multiinstitutional cohort of individuals diagnosed between January 1, 1970, and December 31,1986, at an age <21 years, who had survived 5 years from diagnosis). The survey assessed knowledge of their cancer diagnosis and associated therapies in a 3- to 5-minute telephone questionnaire. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Responses were compared with medical record data for accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value. RESULTS: Overall, 72% accurately reported their diagnosis with precision and 19% were accurate but not precise. Individuals with central nervous system (CNS) cancer (odds ratio, 5.1; 95% confidence interval, 2.6-9.9) and neuroblastoma (OR, 4.2; 95% CI, 1.8-9.6) were more likely not to know their cancer diagnosis. Participants' accuracy rates for reporting their treatment history was 94% for chemotherapy, 89% for radiation, and 93% for splenectomy. Among those who received anthracyclines, only 30% recalled receiving daunorubicin therapy and 52% recalled receiving doxorubicin therapy, even after prompting with the drugs' names. Among those who received radiotherapy, 70% recalled the site of radiotherapy. History of receiving a written medical summary, attending a long-term follow-up clinic, and anxiety about late effects were not associated with greater knowledge. CONCLUSIONS: Important knowledge deficits exist among adult survivors of childhood cancer regarding basic aspects of their diagnosis and treatment. Such deficits could impair survivors' ability to seek and receive appropriate long-term follow-up care.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.287.14.1832

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 374

Metadata

Authors
Kadan-Lottick, N. S., Robison, L. L., Gurney, J. G., Neglia, J. P., Yasui, Y., Hayashi, R., Hudson, M., Greenberg, M., & Mertens, A. C.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2002-04-10
Volume
287
Issue
14
Pages
1832
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2071750125
Cited by
374
References
0
FWCI
9.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Childhood Cancer Survivors' Knowledge About Their Past Diagnosis and Treatment: Childhood Cancer Survivor Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.287.14.1832
The paper
Kadan-Lottick, N. S., Robison, L. L., Gurney, J. G., Neglia, J. P., Yasui, Y., Hayashi, R., Hudson, M., Greenberg, M., & Mertens, A. C. (2002). Childhood Cancer Survivors' Knowledge About Their Past Diagnosis and Treatment: Childhood Cancer Survivor Study. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.287.14.1832

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.