ArticlePalliative medicine2021
Timely identification of patients in need of palliative care using the Double Surprise Question: A prospective study on outpatients with cancer.
Article in Palliative medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The Surprise Question and clinician-predicted prognosis: systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ supportive & palliative care · 2024Pooled it
- Prognostic evaluation in patients with advanced cancer in the last months of life: ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline.ESMO open · 2023Guideline
- The utility of the surprise question: A useful tool for identifying patients nearing the last phase of life? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Palliative medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Article
- Observational
- When would I be surprised? Variability in predicted probability of survival for being "surprised" and "not surprised" to the surprise question.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Article
- A cost-effectiveness analysis of the effect of hospital variation in the probability of providing treatment with curative intent in potentially curable esophageal and gastric cancer patients.Diseases of the esophagus : official journal of the International Society for Diseases of the Esophagus · 2025Article
- Development of a patient assessment to meet the needs of patients suffering from advanced non-oncological diseases - the KOPAL trial.BMC primary care · 2025Article
- In-Hospital Death of Patients with Known Life-Threatening Disease: A Retrospective Analysis.Palliative medicine reports · 2024Article
- When to initiate early palliative care? Challenges faced by healthcare providers.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- External Validation and User Experiences of the ProPal-COPD Tool to Identify the Palliative Phase in COPD.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Surprise Question ("
aimTo examine the prognostic accuracy of the Double Surprise Question in outpatients with cancer.
designA prospective study.
participantsTwelve medical oncologists completed the Double Surprise Question for 379 patients.
resultsIn group 1 (original Surprise Question "yes": surprised if dead) 92.1% (176/191) of the patients were still alive after 1 year, in group 2a (original and additional Surprise Question "no": not surprised if dead and not surprised if alive) 60.0% (63/105), and in group 2b (original Surprise Question "no," additional Surprise Question "yes": surprised if alive) 26.5% (22/83) (
conclusionsThe Double Surprise Question is a promising tool to more accurately identify outpatients with cancer at risk of dying within 1 year, and therefore, those in need of palliative care. Studies should reveal whether the implementation of the Double Surprise Question leads to more timely palliative care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.