CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 36

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Interventions promoting cognitive function in patients experiencing cancer related cognitive impairment: A systematic review

Oldacres, Laura, Hegarty, Josephine, O'Regan, Patricia, Murphy‐Coakley, Noreen M, Saab, Mohamad M.·2023·Psycho-Oncology
DOI 10.1002/pon.6073
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objective: To examine the effect of interventions used to enhance cognitive function in patients experiencing cancer‐related cognitive impairment. Methods: Studies including adults with a non‐metastatic cancer who have received chemotherapy as part of their treatment and who have undergone interventions targeting cancer‐related cognitive impairment were included. Studies involving patients with metastatic cancer and pre‐existing cognitive deficits were excluded. Academic Search Complete, CINAHL Plus with full text, MEDLINE, Education Full Text, PsycARTICLES, PsycINFO, and ERIC were searched for studies published between January 2011 and September 2022. Data extraction and quality appraisal were conducted by two authors and cross‐checked by the review team. Quality appraisal was conducted using 12 items from the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Findings were presented narratively without meta‐analysis. Results: Thirty‐one studies were included. Interventions were categorised as integrative/complementary, cognitive behavioural therapy and compensatory strategies, exercise, psychoeducational/psychosocial, brain‐training, and pharmacological. Over 100 instruments were identified, including the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy‐Cognitive, Trail Making Tests‐A and B, and instruments measuring secondary outcomes, including depression. Instruments often measured attention and concentration, language, memory, executive function, and/or patient‐reported outcomes. Improvements were reported, with most studies measuring some or various aspects of cognitive functioning and very few studies measuring all domains of cognitive functioning, making it difficult to draw definitive conclusions about effectiveness. Conclusions: Various interventions are available to treat cancer‐related cognitive impairment. Outcome measurement was inconsistent and future research should prioritise using standardised measures. Current evidence, whilst not being definitive, suggests that certain interventions show greater promise than others, including cognitive behavioural therapy and brain training.

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.6073

Cites

5 of 5 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

Research works printed but not linked: 91

  1. Ferlay J, 2020, Global Cancer Observatory
  2. 10.3322/caac.21660 · DOI · Paper page
  3. 10.1200/JCO.19.03141 · DOI
  4. 10.1111/tbj.13153 · DOI
  5. World Health Organisation (WHO), 2021, Estimated Number of New Cases from 2020 to 2040, Both Sexes, Age 0–85
  6. 10.1016/j.annonc.2021.01.006 · DOI
  7. 10.1016/j.mcna.2017.06.003 · DOI
  8. 10.1002/1878‐0261.12428 · DOI
  9. Department of Health, 2017, National Cancer Strategy 2017–2026
  10. 10.1007/s11764‐018‐0692‐x · DOI
  11. 10.1186/s13058‐018‐1062‐3 · DOI
  12. 10.1093/jnci/djz179 · DOI
  13. 10.1080/15376516.2019.1600086 · DOI
  14. 10.1111/bph.15086 · DOI
  15. 10.1007/s00520‐020‐05739‐9 · DOI
  16. 10.1002/pon.5696 · DOI
  17. 10.1007/s11764‐019‐00745‐1 · DOI
  18. 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2019.05.001 · DOI
  19. 10.3389/fonc.2015.00059 · DOI
  20. Niu R, 2020, Chemotherapy‐induced grey matter abnormalities in cancer survivors: a voxel‐wise neuroimaging meta‐analysis, Brain Imaging Behav, 1
  21. 10.1007/s11764‐020‐00870‐2 · DOI
  22. 10.1038/srep42684 · DOI
  23. 10.1007/s12149‐019‐01331‐2 · DOI
  24. 10.1007/s11764‐017‐0661‐9 · DOI
  25. 10.1002/pon.4745 · DOI
  26. 10.1007/s11065‐020‐09441‐9 · DOI
  27. 10.1002/pon.4012 · DOI
  28. 10.1002/pon.5339 · DOI
  29. 10.1016/j.jgo.2020.05.012 · DOI
  30. 10.1155/2016/1820954 · DOI · Paper page
  31. 10.1007/s11065‐021‐09532‐1 · DOI
  32. Higgins JPT, 2021, Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions
  33. 10.1186/1472‐6947‐7‐16 · DOI · Paper page
  34. 10.12968/ijtr.2018.0088 · DOI
  35. 10.1016/j.apmr.2020.01.021 · DOI
  36. 10.1007/s00520‐018‐4430‐8 · DOI
  37. 10.1188/17.ONF.255‐264 · DOI
  38. 10.1002/pon4370 · DOI
  39. 10.1111/ijn.12419 · DOI
  40. 10.1002/pon.3296 · DOI
  41. 10.1002/cncr.33074 · DOI
  42. 10.1177/0825859718796794 · DOI
  43. 10.1159/000447744 · DOI
  44. 10.1016/j.apnu.2010.05.004 · DOI
  45. 10.1007/s00520‐017‐3589‐8 · DOI
  46. 10.1097/NCC.0000000000000217 · DOI
  47. 10.1177/1534735418777109 · DOI
  48. 10.1002/14651858.CD011705 · DOI
  49. 10.1002/14651858.CD012633 · DOI
  50. 10.1093/heapro/daab016/6153940 · DOI
  51. Hong QN, 2018, Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) User Guide
  52. Popay J, 2006, Guidance on the Conduct of Narrative Synthesis in Systematic Reviews: A Product from the ESRC Methods Programme
  53. 10.1371/journal.pone.0231379 · DOI
  54. 10.1016//j.jpsychores.2021.110628 · DOI
  55. 10.1007/s13187‐022‐02211‐6 · DOI
  56. 10.1093/jjco/hyaa166 · DOI
  57. 10.1177/1534735420938450 · DOI
  58. 10.1155/2022/2459013 · DOI
  59. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.02.013 · DOI
  60. 10.1186/s12906‐019‐2800‐5 · DOI
  61. 10.1002/cncr.34209 · DOI
  62. 10.1002/pon.1878 · DOI
  63. 10.1002/cncr.29891 · DOI
  64. 10.1007/s13187‐017‐1263‐y · DOI
  65. 10.4251/wjgo.v14.il.319 · DOI
  66. 10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.101081 · DOI
  67. 10.1007/s00520‐012‐1647‐9 · DOI
  68. 10.1093/annonc/mdq749 · DOI
  69. Cui Z, 2018, Clinical study on qi‐boosting and spirit regulating acupuncture on chemotherapy‐induced mild cognitive impairment in breast cancer patients, Int J Clin Acupunct, 27, 222
  70. 10.12659/msm.909712 · DOI
  71. 10.1016/j.bbi.2020.04.035 · DOI
  72. 10.1002/cncr.33186 · DOI
  73. 10.1188/22.CJON.71‐77 · DOI
  74. 10.1007/s10549‐012‐2210‐6 · DOI
  75. 10.17605/osf.10/79pt6 · DOI
  76. 10.1186/s13058‐022‐01530‐2 · DOI
  77. 10.1007/s00520‐016‐3302‐3 · DOI
  78. 10.21203/rs.3.rs‐1044265/v1 · DOI
  79. 10.1016/j.ejca.2021.11.006 · DOI
  80. 10.1007/s11764‐015‐0463‐x · DOI
  81. 10.1586/era.11.202 · DOI
  82. 10.1016/S1470‐2045(18)30938‐0 · DOI
  83. 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2019.103514 · DOI
  84. 10.1080/13854046.2016.1275819 · DOI
  85. 10.1097/phm.0000000000000083 · DOI · Paper page
  86. 10.1002/pon.5339 · DOI
  87. 10.1177/1534735420988343 · DOI
  88. 10.1007/s00415‐020‐10381‐w · DOI
  89. 10.1016/j.psychores.2019.109911 · DOI
  90. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN).Survivorship care for cancer‐related late and long‐term effects. Chapter 5: Cognitive dysfunction. [internet] USA National Comprehensive Cancer Network; 2020 [updated 2020].NCCN%20Guidelines%20for%20Patients%20Survivorship%20for%20Cancer‐Related%20Late%20and%20Long‐Term%20Effects
  91. 10.1200/jco.2018.78.8687 · DOI · Paper page

Metadata

Authors
Oldacres, L., Hegarty, J., O'Regan, P., Murphy‐Coakley, N. M., & Saab, M. M.
Venue
Psycho-Oncology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2022-12-14
Volume
32
Issue
2
Pages
214-228
ISSN
  • 1057-9249
  • 1099-1611
DOI
10.1002/pon.6073
Cited by
36
References
5
Language
en
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (vor)
Funders
Irish Cancer Society

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