PURPOSE: Cognitive dysfunction is a common concern for children with brain tumors (BTs) or those receiving central nervous system (CNS) toxic cancer treatments. Perceived cognitive function (PCF) is an economical screening that may be used to trigger full, formal cognitive testing. We assessed the potential clinical utility of PCF by comparing parent-reported scores for children with cancer with scores from the general US population. METHODS: Children (n = 515; mean age = 13.5 years; 57.0 % male) and one of their parents were recruited from pediatric oncology clinics. Most children (53.3 %) had a diagnosis of CNS tumor with an average time since diagnosis of 5.6 years. PCF was evaluated using the pediatric PCF item bank (pedsPCF), which was developed and normed on a sample drawn from the US general pediatric population. Children also completed computer-based neuropsychological tests. We tested relationships between PCF and clinical variables. Differential item functioning (DIF) was used to evaluate measurement bias between the samples. RESULTS: No item showed DIF, supporting the use of pedsPCF in the cancer sample. PedsPCF differentiated children with (vs. without) a BT, p < 0.01, and groups defined by years since diagnosis, p < 0.01. It significantly (p < 0.05) correlated with computerized neuropsychological tests in 40 of 60 comparisons. Children with BTs were rated as having worse pedsPCF scores than the norm, regardless of years since diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: PCF significantly differentiated cancer survivors with various clinical characteristics. It is brief and easy to implement. PCF should be considered for routine care of pediatric cancer survivors.
PURPOSE:Cognitive dysfunction is a common concern for children with brain tumors (BTs) or those receiving central nervous system (CNS) toxic cancer treatments. Perceived cognitive function (PCF) is an economical screening that may be used to trigger full, formal cognitive testing. We assessed the potential clinical utility of PCF by comparing parent-reported scores for children with cancer with scores from the general US population. METHODS:Children (n = 515; mean age = 13.5 years; 57.0 % male) and one of their parents were recruited from pediatric oncology clinics. Most children (53.3 %) had a diagnosis of CNS tumor with an average time since diagnosis of 5.6 years. PCF was evaluated using the pediatric PCF item bank (pedsPCF), which was developed and normed on a sample drawn from the US general pediatric population. Children also completed computer-based neuropsychological tests. We tested relationships between PCF and clinical variables. Differential item functioning (DIF) was used to evaluate measurement bias between the samples. RESULTS: No item showed DIF, supporting the use of pedsPCF in the cancer sample. PedsPCF differentiated children with (vs. without) a BT, p < 0.01, and groups defined by years since diagnosis, p < 0.01. It significantly (p < 0.05) correlated with computerized neuropsychological tests in 40 of 60 comparisons. Children with BTs were rated as having worse pedsPCF scores than the norm, regardless of years since diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS:PCF significantly differentiated cancer survivors with various clinical characteristics. It is brief and easy to implement. PCF should be considered for routine care of pediatric cancer survivors.
Authors: Bryce B Reeve; Ron D Hays; Jakob B Bjorner; Karon F Cook; Paul K Crane; Jeanne A Teresi; David Thissen; Dennis A Revicki; David J Weiss; Ronald K Hambleton; Honghu Liu; Richard Gershon; Steven P Reise; Jin-shei Lai; David Cella Journal: Med Care Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Jin-Shei Lai; Frank Zelko; Zeeshan Butt; David Cella; Mark W Kieran; Kevin R Krull; Susan Magasi; Stewart Goldman Journal: Childs Nerv Syst Date: 2010-07-23 Impact factor: 1.475
Authors: Jin-Shei Lai; Corey Bregman; Frank Zelko; Cindy Nowinski; David Cella; Jennifer J Beaumont; Stewart Goldman Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2017-04-26 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Jin-Shei Lai; Siera Goodnight; Nancy R Downing; Rebecca E Ready; Jane S Paulsen; Anna L Kratz; Julie C Stout; Michael K McCormack; David Cella; Christopher Ross; Jenna Russell; Noelle E Carlozzi Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2017-12-08 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Jin-Shei Lai; Cindy J Nowinski; Frank Zelko; Katy Wortman; James Burns; Douglas R Nordli; David Cella Journal: Epilepsy Behav Date: 2015-04-07 Impact factor: 2.937
Authors: Mary C Hooke; Cheryl Rodgers; Olga Taylor; Kari M Koerner; Pauline Mitby; Ida Moore; Michael E Scheurer; Marilyn J Hockenberry; Wei Pan Journal: Cancer Nurs Date: 2018 Nov/Dec Impact factor: 2.592
Authors: Patricia Vega-Fernandez; Shana Vanderburgh White; Frank Zelko; Natasha M Ruth; Deborah M Levy; Eyal Muscal; Marisa S Klein-Gitelman; Adam M Huber; Lori B Tucker; Tresa Roebuck-Spencer; Jun Ying; Hermine I Brunner Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: Ashwaq AlE'ed; Patricia Vega-Fernandez; Eyal Muscal; Claas H Hinze; Lori B Tucker; Simone Appenzeller; Brigitte Bader-Meunier; Johannes Roth; Vicenç Torrente-Segarra; Marisa S Klein-Gitelman; Deborah M Levy; Tresa Roebuck-Spencer; Hermine I Brunner Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2017-08-29 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: Mary C Hooke; Daniel Hatch; Marilyn J Hockenberry; Susan Whitman; Ida Moore; David Montgomery; Kari Marano; Pauline Mitby; Michael E Scheurer; Olga Taylor; Wei Pan Journal: J Pediatr Oncol Nurs Date: 2020-03-06 Impact factor: 1.636