Effects of cognitive rehabilitation interventions on non-central nervous system cancer survivors: A meta-analysis

IntroductionCancer treatments can have a detrimental impact on cancer survivors’ cognitive function. Cognitive rehabilitation is considered the first-line intervention to address cognitive difficulties of cancer survivors. Nevertheless, its efficacy remains unclear.ObjectivesThis meta-analysis aimed...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:European psychiatry 2023-03, Vol.66 (S1), p.S116-S117
Main Authors: Oliveira, A. F., Reis, J. D., Santos, I. M., Torres, A.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Abstract
Brain cancer
Cancer therapies
Cognitive ability
Meta-analysis
Oral Communication
Rehabilitation
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:IntroductionCancer treatments can have a detrimental impact on cancer survivors’ cognitive function. Cognitive rehabilitation is considered the first-line intervention to address cognitive difficulties of cancer survivors. Nevertheless, its efficacy remains unclear.ObjectivesThis meta-analysis aimed to understand the effects of cognitive rehabilitation in non-central system (non-CNS) cancer survivors, through the assessment of the overall efficacy on subjective cognitive outcomes.MethodsThis meta-analysis was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis statement. An electronic search on the databases PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted in May 2021, considering the past 15 years, by two independent authors. Studies were eligible if they included cancer survivors (excluding CNS cancers) who were exposed to cognitive rehabilitation interventions, in which the subjective cognitive effects were measured through self-report questionnaires. The quality of studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for Randomized Trials. The effect size was the standardized mean difference in the cognitive assessment, between baseline and post-intervention. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using I2 Statistic. Publication bias was evaluated with Egger’s test. P
ISSN:0924-9338
1778-3585
DOI:10.1192/j.eurpsy.2023.314