Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 320

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Attentional processes and their remediation in children treated for cancer: A literature review and the development of a therapeutic approach

BUTLER, ROBERT W., COPELAND, DONNA R.·2002·Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society
DOI 10.1017/s1355617701020112
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

It is now generally accepted that central nervous system treatments for childhood cancer can result in significant cognitive impairment, most commonly in the areas of attention/concentration. We review the literature on attentional and neurocognitive deficits in this population, and also efforts to remediate attentional deficits in other brain injured populations. It was our goal to develop an innovative, psychologically based outpatient rehabilitation program that would improve dysfunctional attentional processes and associated neuropsychological deficits. The characteristics of this program and a pilot study of its effectiveness are described. Participants were 31 off-therapy cancer survivors with documented attention deficits. Twenty-one completed the cognitive remediation program (CRP) and 10 served as comparisons. All participants completed a test of vigilance attention, 2 tests with an attentional component, and an arithmetic academic achievement measure. When the scores of the 2 groups were compared, the CRP group exhibited statistically significant improvement on all attentional measures. In contrast, the comparison group did not manifest any significant changes. Neither group demonstrated statistically significant changes on the arithmetic achievement test. We believe that the CRP has potential for improving attention/concentration, but generalization to academic achievement remains unproven. Phase 3 clinical trials and the documentation of long-term treatment gains are needed. Furthermore, it will be necessary to demonstrate the ecological validity of the CRP. With these caveats, this therapeutic approach may be helpful in other populations of cognitively impaired children and young adults, such as patients who have suffered traumatic brain injury. (JINS, 2002, 8, 115–124.)

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 · 10.1017/s1355617701020112

Cites

48 of 48 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 48 references

Cited by

See all 320

Metadata

Authors
BUTLER, R. W., & COPELAND, D. R.
Venue
Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
2002-01
Volume
8
Issue
1
Pages
115-124
ISSN
  • 1355-6177 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-7661
DOI
10.1017/s1355617701020112
OpenAlex
W2162937987
Cited by
320
References
48
FWCI
17.47
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: Attentional processes and their remediation in children treated for cancer: A literature review and the development of a therapeutic approach. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/s1355617701020112
The paper
BUTLER, R. W., & COPELAND, D. R. (2002). Attentional processes and their remediation in children treated for cancer: A literature review and the development of a therapeutic approach. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1355617701020112

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.