ArticleEuropean journal of cancer care2022
The prognostic value of the 12-, 6-, 3- and 1-month 'Surprise Question' in cancer patients: A prospective cohort study in three hospitals.
Article in European journal of cancer care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of different proxy approaches to determine the need for specialized palliative care in patients with incurable cancer.BMC palliative care · 2026Article
- Timely integration of palliative care into oncology care for patients with bone metastases at the radiotherapy department: A pilot study on acceptability and feasibility.Technical innovations & patient support in radiation oncology · 2025Article
- The prognostic value of the 12-, 6-, 3- and 1-month 'Surprise Question' in cancer patients: A prospective cohort study in three hospitals.European journal of cancer care · 2022Article
- Temporal, Probabilistic and Surprise Question Approaches of Clinician Predicted Survival in Advanced Hepatopancreaticobiliary Cancers: A Prospective Cohort Study.Indian journal of palliative careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis prospective study aimed to evaluate the performance of the 'Surprise Question' (SQ) 'Would I be surprised if this patient died in the next 12 months?' in predicting survival of 12, 6, 3 and 1 month(s), respectively, in hospitalised patients with cancer.
methodsIn three hospitals, physicians were asked to answer SQs for 12/6/3/1 month(s) for inpatients with cancer. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were calculated.
resultsA total of 783 patients were included, of whom 51% died in the 12-month period after inclusion. Sensitivity of the SQ predicting death within 12 months was 0.79, specificity was 0.66, the positive predictive value was 0.71 and the negative predictive value was 0.75. When the SQ concerned a shorter survival period, sensitivities and positive predictive values decreased, whereas specificities and negative predictive values increased. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, the SQ was significantly associated with mortality (OR 3.93, 95% CI 2.70-5.71, p < 0.01).
conclusionsThe 12-month SQ predicts death in patients with cancer admitted to the hospital reasonably well. Shortening the timeframe decreases sensitivities and increases specificities. The four surprise questions may help to identify patients for whom palliative care is indicated.
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.