Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35701634›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2022

Using three scenarios to explain life expectancy in advanced cancer: attitudes of patients, family members, and other healthcare professionals.

Sharon H Nahm, Martin R Stockler, Andrew J Martin, Peter Grimison, Peter Fox, Rob Zielinski, Geoffrey At Hawson, Martin Hn Tattersall, Belinda E Kiely

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2022. 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 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Timing of prognostic discussions in people with advanced cancer: a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Sharon H NahmThe NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, The University of Sydney, Locked Bag 77, Camperdown, Sydney, NSW, 1450, Australia.
Martin R StocklerThe NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, The University of Sydney, Locked Bag 77, Camperdown, Sydney, NSW, 1450, Australia.
Andrew J MartinThe NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, The University of Sydney, Locked Bag 77, Camperdown, Sydney, NSW, 1450, Australia.
Peter GrimisonSydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Peter FoxCentral West Cancer Care Centre, Orange, Australia.
Rob ZielinskiCentral West Cancer Care Centre, Orange, Australia.
Geoffrey At HawsonNambour General Hospital, Nambour, Australia.
Martin Hn TattersallSydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Belinda E KielyThe NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, The University of Sydney, Locked Bag 77, Camperdown, Sydney, NSW, 1450, Australia. belinda.kiely@sydney.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1662-3523

Funding

Conquer Cancer Foundation Young Investigator Award
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo evaluate a web-based tool for estimating and explaining three scenarios for expected survival time to people with advanced cancer (patients), their family members (FMs), and other healthcare professionals (HCPs).

methodsThirty-three oncologists estimated the "median survival of a group of similar patients" for patients seeking quantitative prognostic information. The web-based tool generated worst-case, most likely, and best-case scenarios for survival based on the oncologist's estimate. Oncologists presented the scenarios to each patient and provided a printed summary to patients, FMs, and HCPs. Attitudes to the information were assessed by questionnaires. Observed survival for each patient was compared with the oncologist's estimated survival and the three scenarios.

resultsPrognosis was discussed with 222 patients: median age 67 years; 61% male; most common primary sites pancreas 15%, non-small-cell lung 15%, and colorectal 12%. The median (range) for observed survival times was 9 months (0.5-43) and for oncologist's estimated survival times was 12 months (2-96). Ninety-one percent of patients, 91% of FMs, and 84% of HCPs agreed that it was helpful having life expectancy explained as three scenarios. The majority (77%) of patients judged the information presented about their life expectancy to be the same or better than they had expected before the consultation. The survival estimates met a priori criteria for calibration, precision, and accuracy.

conclusionsPatients, FMs, and HCPs found it helpful to receive personalized prognostic information formatted as three scenarios for survival. It was feasible, acceptable, and safe to use a web-based resource to do this.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell LungLung NeoplasmsNeoplasmsAgedDelivery of Health CareFamilyFemaleHumansLife ExpectancyMalePrognosisAdvanced cancerDoctor-patient communicationLife expectancyPrognosisPrognostic discussionsScenarios for survival

Identifiers

PMID35701634
PMCPMC9385826

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.