Skip to main content
. 2020 Sep 30;126(24):5328–5336. doi: 10.1002/cncr.33186

TABLE 2.

Mean Scores for Subjective Cognition With FACT‐Cog Assessment

Group A: Computerized CR (n = 48) Group B: Exercises at Home (n = 44) Group C: Phone Call (n = 51) P a
PCI T0 33.2 (13.2) 35.4 (15.6) 34.1 (13.6) .66
PCI T1 40.8 (11.8) 44.0 (16.1) 44.4 (12.2)
PCI T2 47.5 (11.8) 47.4 (17.1) 44.2 (12.5)
PCI T3 b 49.0 (12.9) 45.2 (16.5) 43.5 (12.9)
7‐Point improvement in PCI score between T0 and T3, n (%) b 36 (75.0) 26 (59.1) 29 (56.9) .13
PCI: difference between T0 and T3 b 16.3 (14.7) 11.1 (14.8) 9.1 (12.6) .02
PCA: difference between T0 and T3 b 5.3 (5.6) 1.8 (5.3) 2.7 (4.3) <.01
FACT impact on QOL: difference between T0 and T3 b 5.1 (5.4) 2.6 (4.1) 3.8 (3.9) .01
FACT comments from others: difference between T0 and T3 b 2.7 (3.6) 1.0 (4.1) 1.6 (2.8) .05

Abbreviations: CR, cognitive rehabilitation; FACT‐Cog, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Cognitive Function; PCA, perceived cognitive abilities; PCI, perceived cognitive impairments; QOL, quality of life; T0, baseline; T1, at 1 month; T2, at 2 months; T3, at the end of the 3‐month program.

All values are presented as mean (SD) unless noted otherwise.

a

Kruskal‐Wallis or Fisher's exact test. Significant values appear in boldface type.

b

Missing = 24 (14.4%).