Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 274

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Subjective cognitive dysfunction in breast cancer patients: a systematic review

Pullens, Marleen J.J., De Vries, Jolanda, Roukema, Jan A.·2010·Psycho-Oncology

Abstract

Objective: Results from studies examining subjective cognitive dysfunctioning (SCD) in breast cancer (BC) patients are unclear. Therefore, this review examined (i) the prevalence of SCD, (ii) the differences between (treatment) groups in SCD, (iii) the course of SCD, (iv) the relationship of SCD with psychological factors, and (v) the relationship between SCD and objective cognitive dysfunctioning (OCD). Methods: Through a systematic literature search, we identified 27 studies concerning SCD in BC patients. The methodological quality of these studies was examined according to predefined criteria. The methodological limitations and heterogeneity across studies were taken into account. Results: Eight studies were graded of high, 12 of moderate, and seven of low quality. Twenty‐one to 90% of the patients reported SCD. The comparison between different (treatment) groups, at different time points of the cancer trajectory, rendered inconclusive evidence regarding the relation of SCD to the cancer itself, chemotherapy, and hormonal therapy. SCD and OCD were unrelated, but SCD was associated with psychological distress, fatigue, and health status. Conclusions: SCD does exist in BC patients, but it remains unclear if this is more commonly found in BC patients than in the general population. It is inconclusive if SCD is developed post‐treatment or already exists pretreatment. Since there is a relationship between SCD and anxiety and depression, SCD may be more indicative of emotional distress instead of OCD. Attention toward SCD in future research is warranted in order to draw valid conclusions regarding SCD in BC patients. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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 · 10.1002/pon.1673

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

Cites

Show all 6 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Pullens, M. J. J., De Vries, J., & Roukema, J. A.
Venue
Psycho-Oncology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-10-27
Volume
19
Issue
11
Pages
1127-1138
ISSN
  • 1057-9249 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-1611
OpenAlex
W2039723351
Cited by
274
References
6
FWCI
1.10
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

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.