非药物认知干预对癌症儿童实际日常生活功能的影响:系统回顾

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 HEMATOLOGY
Allison J L'Hotta, Bailey Martin-Giacalone, Jennifer Zink, Anna Fung, Andrew Myers, Kim Lipsey, Rachelle Brick
{"title":"非药物认知干预对癌症儿童实际日常生活功能的影响:系统回顾","authors":"Allison J L'Hotta, Bailey Martin-Giacalone, Jennifer Zink, Anna Fung, Andrew Myers, Kim Lipsey, Rachelle Brick","doi":"10.1002/pbc.31429","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Childhood cancer survivors (CCS) frequently experience cognitive challenges, which impact their ability to participate in functional activities. This systematic review examines the effects of nonpharmacological cognitive interventions on functional outcomes (e.g., activities of daily living). We systematically searched eight databases (e.g., PubMed, EMBASE) from 2012 to 2023. Two team members independently screened articles and extracted article, intervention, sample characteristics, and outcome data. We assessed intervention reporting with the Template for Intervention Description and Replication. Fourteen studies met inclusion criteria, representing 12 unique trials. Four of the six trials evaluating Cogmed, a computerized working memory training program, demonstrated functional benefits; small to large effects were observed for academic achievement (Cohen's d = 0.28-0.87) and decreased inattention in daily life (d = -0.36 and -0.98). Other interventions included exergaming, math or reading interventions, occupational therapy, and neurofeedback. Less than half of studies reported on intervention personalization (n = 5), fidelity assessment (n = 4), or cost (n = 1). Study heterogeneity limited our ability to meta-analyze results for functional outcomes. Limited evidence and gaps in quality of intervention reporting are barriers to addressing the cognitive challenges of CCS. Standardizing functional outcome measurement, identifying effective interventions, and improving the quality of intervention reporting could accelerate the translation of intervention research to clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":19822,"journal":{"name":"Pediatric Blood & Cancer","volume":" ","pages":"e31429"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of Non-Pharmacological Cognitive Interventions on Real-World Daily Function in Children With Cancer: A Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Allison J L'Hotta, Bailey Martin-Giacalone, Jennifer Zink, Anna Fung, Andrew Myers, Kim Lipsey, Rachelle Brick\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/pbc.31429\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Childhood cancer survivors (CCS) frequently experience cognitive challenges, which impact their ability to participate in functional activities. This systematic review examines the effects of nonpharmacological cognitive interventions on functional outcomes (e.g., activities of daily living). We systematically searched eight databases (e.g., PubMed, EMBASE) from 2012 to 2023. Two team members independently screened articles and extracted article, intervention, sample characteristics, and outcome data. We assessed intervention reporting with the Template for Intervention Description and Replication. Fourteen studies met inclusion criteria, representing 12 unique trials. Four of the six trials evaluating Cogmed, a computerized working memory training program, demonstrated functional benefits; small to large effects were observed for academic achievement (Cohen's d = 0.28-0.87) and decreased inattention in daily life (d = -0.36 and -0.98). Other interventions included exergaming, math or reading interventions, occupational therapy, and neurofeedback. Less than half of studies reported on intervention personalization (n = 5), fidelity assessment (n = 4), or cost (n = 1). Study heterogeneity limited our ability to meta-analyze results for functional outcomes. Limited evidence and gaps in quality of intervention reporting are barriers to addressing the cognitive challenges of CCS. Standardizing functional outcome measurement, identifying effective interventions, and improving the quality of intervention reporting could accelerate the translation of intervention research to clinical practice.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19822,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pediatric Blood & Cancer\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"e31429\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pediatric Blood & Cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/pbc.31429\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pediatric Blood & Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pbc.31429","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

儿童癌症幸存者(CCS)经常会遇到认知挑战,这影响了他们参与功能性活动的能力。本系统综述研究了非药物认知干预对功能性结果(如日常生活活动)的影响。我们系统地检索了 2012 年至 2023 年期间的八个数据库(如 PubMed、EMBASE)。两名团队成员独立筛选文章并提取文章、干预、样本特征和结果数据。我们使用 "干预描述和复制模板 "对干预报告进行了评估。有 14 项研究符合纳入标准,代表了 12 项独特的试验。在六项评估计算机化工作记忆训练计划 Cogmed 的试验中,有四项显示出了功能性益处;在学业成绩(Cohen's d = 0.28-0.87)和减少日常生活中注意力不集中(d = -0.36 和 -0.98)方面观察到了小到大的效果。其他干预措施包括电子游戏、数学或阅读干预、职业疗法和神经反馈。不到一半的研究报告了干预个性化(5 项)、忠实度评估(4 项)或成本(1 项)。研究的异质性限制了我们对功能性结果进行元分析的能力。有限的证据和干预报告质量上的差距是解决儿童疾病认知挑战的障碍。将功能结果测量标准化、确定有效的干预措施以及提高干预措施报告的质量可以加速干预研究向临床实践的转化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Impact of Non-Pharmacological Cognitive Interventions on Real-World Daily Function in Children With Cancer: A Systematic Review.

Childhood cancer survivors (CCS) frequently experience cognitive challenges, which impact their ability to participate in functional activities. This systematic review examines the effects of nonpharmacological cognitive interventions on functional outcomes (e.g., activities of daily living). We systematically searched eight databases (e.g., PubMed, EMBASE) from 2012 to 2023. Two team members independently screened articles and extracted article, intervention, sample characteristics, and outcome data. We assessed intervention reporting with the Template for Intervention Description and Replication. Fourteen studies met inclusion criteria, representing 12 unique trials. Four of the six trials evaluating Cogmed, a computerized working memory training program, demonstrated functional benefits; small to large effects were observed for academic achievement (Cohen's d = 0.28-0.87) and decreased inattention in daily life (d = -0.36 and -0.98). Other interventions included exergaming, math or reading interventions, occupational therapy, and neurofeedback. Less than half of studies reported on intervention personalization (n = 5), fidelity assessment (n = 4), or cost (n = 1). Study heterogeneity limited our ability to meta-analyze results for functional outcomes. Limited evidence and gaps in quality of intervention reporting are barriers to addressing the cognitive challenges of CCS. Standardizing functional outcome measurement, identifying effective interventions, and improving the quality of intervention reporting could accelerate the translation of intervention research to clinical practice.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Pediatric Blood & Cancer
Pediatric Blood & Cancer 医学-小儿科
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
9.40%
发文量
546
审稿时长
1.5 months
期刊介绍: Pediatric Blood & Cancer publishes the highest quality manuscripts describing basic and clinical investigations of blood disorders and malignant diseases of childhood including diagnosis, treatment, epidemiology, etiology, biology, and molecular and clinical genetics of these diseases as they affect children, adolescents, and young adults. Pediatric Blood & Cancer will also include studies on such treatment options as hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, immunology, and gene therapy.
×
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