Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 401

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 15 of the 15 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Psychological Outcomes in Long-Term Survivors of Childhood Brain Cancer: A Report From the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study

Open access
Zebrack, Brad J., Gurney, James G., Oeffinger, Kevin, Whitton, John, Packer, Roger J., Mertens, Ann, Turk, Norman, Castleberry, Robert, Dreyer, ZoAnn, Robison, Leslie L., Zeltzer, Lonnie K.·2004·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate and compare psychological outcomes in long-term survivors of pediatric brain cancer and siblings of childhood cancer survivors, and to identify significant correlates of psychological distress. Methods: One thousand one hundred one adult survivors of childhood brain cancer and 2,817 siblings completed a long-term follow-up questionnaire allowing assessment of symptoms associated with depression, somatization, and anxiety, as well as demographic, health, and medical information. Results: A large majority of siblings and survivors report few, if any, symptoms of psychological distress. The prevalence of distress approximating clinically significant levels for both survivors (11%) and siblings (5%) reflects rates found in the general population. Yet when accounting for significant sociodemographic, socioeconomic, and health-status variables, survivors of childhood brain cancer, in the aggregate, appear to report significantly higher global distress and depression scores than do siblings. As in the general population, higher levels of distress among survivors and siblings were associated with female sex, low household income, lower educational attainment, being unmarried, not being employed in the past 12 months, and poor physical health status. No diagnostic or treatment-related variables were directly and significantly associated with increases in distress symptoms for survivors of childhood brain cancer. Conclusion: Cancer treatment does not appear to contribute directly to increased psychological distress. Instead, distress appears to be associated with diminished social functioning that may be related to cancer type or treatment. Implementation and evaluation of supportive interventions that enhance survivors' social and vocational skills should be considered.

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 · 10.1200/jco.2004.06.148

Cites

15 of 15 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 15 references

Cited by

See all 401

Metadata

Authors
Zebrack, B. J., Gurney, J. G., Oeffinger, K., Whitton, J., Packer, R. J., Mertens, A., Turk, N., Castleberry, R., Dreyer, Z., Robison, L. L., & Zeltzer, L. K.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2004-03-15
Volume
22
Issue
6
Pages
999-1006
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2160750734
Cited by
401
References
15
FWCI
11.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Psychological Outcomes in Long-Term Survivors of Childhood Brain Cancer: A Report From the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2004.06.148
The paper
Zebrack, B. J., Gurney, J. G., Oeffinger, K., Whitton, J., Packer, R. J., Mertens, A., Turk, N., Castleberry, R., Dreyer, Z., Robison, L. L., & Zeltzer, L. K. (2004). Psychological Outcomes in Long-Term Survivors of Childhood Brain Cancer: A Report From the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2004.06.148

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.