The narrative skills of children with brain tumours were examined. Influence of tumour location, radiotherapy, time post-treatment and presence of hydrocephalus was also investigated, as well as associations between narrative and language abilities.
Seventeen children (aged 5;6-14;11) treated for brain tumour and their matched controls completed a narrative assessment and comprehensive language testing. Audio recorded narratives were analysed for microstructure and macrostructure elements. Between-group comparisons were conducted. Narrative elements were explored in association with tumour and treatment-related variables. Correlation analysis examined relationships between narrative scores and language test performance.
While significant differences were not found between two groups of children across narrative elements, sub-group comparisons revealed marginal differences in macrostructure related to tumour location and hydrocephalus. Children treated with methods other than radiotherapy showed a significant increase in number of mazes in their narratives compared to children who received radiotherapy. Strong positive correlations also existed between narrative elements and language performance.
Preliminary findings highlight the importance of investigating narrative abilities as part of a comprehensive language assessment. Macrostructure should be routinely examined where children are diagnosed with either posterior fossa tumour or hydrocephalus or have undergone surgery and/or chemotherapy for brain tumour.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 May 2025.
All research outputs
#7,770,057
of 29,400,575 outputs
Outputs from Brain Injury
#620
of 2,118 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#91,038
of 317,350 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brain Injury
#9
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 29,400,575 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,118 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,350 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
