Observational studyThe oncologist2026
Effect of patient factors and quality of life on ECOG assignment and inter-rater agreement in hospitalized cancer patients.
Observational study in The oncologist, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundAssigning the ECOG performance status is critical for decision-making in oncology, but it poses challenges in hospitalized patients due to lower concordance and potential alteration by factors related to admission. This study aimed to evaluate the concordance of ECOG assessments among observers, identify associated factors with assignment, and explore its relationship with quality of life (QoL) in hospitalized oncology patients.
methodsA prospective, observational study was conducted on patients admitted to a Medical Oncology Department. Three oncologists independently assessed the ECOG at admission, with a consensus value (ECOGa) being established. The EQ-5D-5L scale was administered within the first 48 hours. Linearly weighted Fleiss' Kappa (wFK) was used to assess concordance, and ordinal generalized linear mixed regression models were applied to analyze associated factors and to calculate values of model-based Kappa for agreement.
resultsA total of 167 patients were included, most of them (76%) with stage IV disease. Overall concordance was wFK 0.773 (95% CI 0.711-0.823). ECOGa was significantly associated with cancer stage (P = .03), reason for admission (P = .01), age (P = .04), and absence of active treatment (P = .01). The pain (P < .001) and self-care (P = .01) subscales of the EQ-5D-5L enhanced the prediction of ECOG performance status, outperforming models based on clinical model or QoL variables. Interobserver agreement, as determined by model-based kappa, was lower in the subgroup of patients with ECOGa = 2 and in patients admitted due to toxicity.
conclusionsAlthough ECOG assignment showed substantial concordance, both patient- and admission-related factors significantly influence its evaluation in hospitalized oncology patients. QoL measures may provide valuable complementary information for functional assessment in this population. A better understanding of the factors and clinical settings associated with lower interobserver agreement could help improve the functional assessment of cancer patients admitted to the hospital.
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.