The Accuracy of Probabilistic Versus Temporal Clinician Prediction of Survival for Patients with Advanced Cancer: A Preliminary Report

Author:

Hui David1,Kilgore Kelly1,Nguyen Linh1,Hall Stacy1,Fajardo Julieta1,Cox-Miller Tonye P.1,Palla Shana L.2,Rhondali Wadih1,Kang Jung Hun13,Kim Sun Hyun14,Del Fabbro Egidio1,Zhukovsky Donna S.1,Reddy Suresh1,Elsayem Ahmed1,Dalal Shalini1,Dev Rony1,Walker Paul1,Yennu Sriram1,Reddy Akhila1,Bruera Eduardo1

Affiliation:

1. a Department of Palliative Care and Rehabilitation Medicine, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA

2. b Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA;

3. c Department of Internal Medicine, Institute of Health Science, College of Medicine, Gyeongsang National University, Jinju, Korea;

4. d Department of Family Medicine, Myong Ji Hospital, Kwandong University College of Medicine, Gyeonggi, Korea

Abstract

Abstract Clinicians have limited accuracy in the prediction of patient survival. We assessed the accuracy of probabilistic clinician prediction of survival (CPS) and temporal CPS for advanced cancer patients admitted to our acute palliative care unit, and identified factors associated with CPS accuracy. Eight physicians and 20 nurses provided their estimation of survival on admission by (a) the temporal approach, “What is the approximate survival for this patient (in days)?” and (b) the probabilistic approach, “What is the approximate probability that this patient will be alive (0%–100%)?” for ≥24 hours, 48 hours, 1 week, 2 weeks, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months. We also collected patient and clinician demographics. Among 151 patients, the median age was 58 years, 95 (63%) were female, and 138 (81%) had solid tumors. The median overall survival time was 12 days. The median temporal CPS was 14 days for physicians and 20 days for nurses. Physicians were more accurate than nurses. A higher accuracy of temporal physician CPS was associated with older patient age. Probabilistic CPS was significantly more accurate than temporal CPS for both physicians and nurses, although this analysis was limited by the different criteria for determining accuracy. With the probabilistic approach, nurses were significantly more accurate at predicting survival at 24 hours and 48 hours, whereas physicians were significantly more accurate at predicting survival at 6 months. The probabilistic approach was associated with high accuracy and has practical implications.

Funder

National Institutes of Health

MD Anderson Cancer Center

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Cancer Research,Oncology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3