Cognitive impairment in cervical cancer survivors—Exploring the discrepancy between subjective and objective assessment

Psycho-Oncology Pub Date : 2024-02-01 DOI:10.1002/pon.6300
E. Areklett, S. Andersson, E. Fagereng, K. Bruheim, J. Stubberud, K. Lindemann
{"title":"Cognitive impairment in cervical cancer survivors—Exploring the discrepancy between subjective and objective assessment","authors":"E. Areklett, S. Andersson, E. Fagereng, K. Bruheim, J. Stubberud, K. Lindemann","doi":"10.1002/pon.6300","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Cancer‐related cognitive impairment has severe implications for the quality of life and societal participation of cervical cancer survivors (CCS). However, there is no research on the association between subjective and objective cognitive impairment (CI) in cervical cancer. This cross‐sectional study aimed to examine the frequency and severity of objective CI in CCS reporting significant subjective CI and explore the discrepancy between subjective and objective CI.Sixty‐five CCS reporting significant subjective CI, defined as 1.5 SD below the normative mean, underwent neuropsychological (NP) assessment covering attention, verbal memory, processing speed, verbal fluency, and executive functions. CCS were compared to healthy age‐matched controls (n = 74). A subjective versus objective discrepancy score was calculated based on the standardized scores within each group.The CCS group performed significantly poorer across all NP tests compared to healthy controls (all p‐values <0.001) and 81.5% had scores below cut‐off as defined by the International Cognition and Cancer Task Force. However, compared to published normative data, most CCS performed within the clinically normal range. Processing speed and verbal memory were the most affected cognitive domains. By calculating a discrepancy score, both groups on average displayed a quite accurate concordance between subjective and objective cognitive functioning.Although CI is evident in CCS, our results confirm that objective and subjective CI represent different constructs and highlight the limitations of normative data. Differentiating subjective and objective CI is important when tailoring effective interventions in the survivorship care of CCS.","PeriodicalId":516935,"journal":{"name":"Psycho-Oncology","volume":"27 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psycho-Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pon.6300","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Cancer‐related cognitive impairment has severe implications for the quality of life and societal participation of cervical cancer survivors (CCS). However, there is no research on the association between subjective and objective cognitive impairment (CI) in cervical cancer. This cross‐sectional study aimed to examine the frequency and severity of objective CI in CCS reporting significant subjective CI and explore the discrepancy between subjective and objective CI.Sixty‐five CCS reporting significant subjective CI, defined as 1.5 SD below the normative mean, underwent neuropsychological (NP) assessment covering attention, verbal memory, processing speed, verbal fluency, and executive functions. CCS were compared to healthy age‐matched controls (n = 74). A subjective versus objective discrepancy score was calculated based on the standardized scores within each group.The CCS group performed significantly poorer across all NP tests compared to healthy controls (all p‐values <0.001) and 81.5% had scores below cut‐off as defined by the International Cognition and Cancer Task Force. However, compared to published normative data, most CCS performed within the clinically normal range. Processing speed and verbal memory were the most affected cognitive domains. By calculating a discrepancy score, both groups on average displayed a quite accurate concordance between subjective and objective cognitive functioning.Although CI is evident in CCS, our results confirm that objective and subjective CI represent different constructs and highlight the limitations of normative data. Differentiating subjective and objective CI is important when tailoring effective interventions in the survivorship care of CCS.
宫颈癌幸存者的认知障碍--探索主观和客观评估之间的差异
与癌症相关的认知障碍严重影响了宫颈癌幸存者(CCS)的生活质量和社会参与。然而,目前还没有关于宫颈癌主观和客观认知障碍(CI)之间关系的研究。这项横断面研究旨在检查报告有明显主观认知障碍的宫颈癌幸存者中客观认知障碍的频率和严重程度,并探讨主观和客观认知障碍之间的差异。65 名报告有明显主观认知障碍的宫颈癌幸存者(定义为低于常模平均值 1.5 SD)接受了神经心理学(NP)评估,评估内容包括注意力、言语记忆、处理速度、言语流畅性和执行功能。CCS 与年龄匹配的健康对照组(n = 74)进行了比较。与健康对照组相比,CCS 组在所有 NP 测试中的表现明显较差(所有 P 值均小于 0.001),81.5% 的得分低于国际认知与癌症工作组所定义的临界值。不过,与已公布的常模数据相比,大多数 CCS 的表现在临床正常范围内。处理速度和言语记忆是受影响最大的认知领域。虽然CI在CCS中很明显,但我们的研究结果证实,客观和主观CI代表了不同的结构,并强调了常模数据的局限性。区分主观和客观 CI 对于为 CCS 患者的生存期护理量身定制有效的干预措施非常重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信