惊喜问题和临床医生预测的预后:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Ankit Gupta, Ruth Burgess, Michael Drozd, John Gierula, Klaus Witte, Sam Straw
{"title":"惊喜问题和临床医生预测的预后:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Ankit Gupta, Ruth Burgess, Michael Drozd, John Gierula, Klaus Witte, Sam Straw","doi":"10.1136/spcare-2024-004879","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Surprise Question, 'Would you be surprised if this person died within the next year?' is a simple tool that can be used by clinicians to identify people within the last year of life. This review aimed to determine the accuracy of this assessment, across different healthcare settings, specialties, follow-up periods and respondents.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Searches were conducted of Medline, Embase, AMED, PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, from inception until 01 January 2024. Studies were included if they reported original data on the ability of the Surprise Question to predict survival. For each study (including subgroups), sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values and accuracy were determined.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our dataset comprised 56 distinct cohorts, including 68 829 patients. In a pooled analysis, the sensitivity of the Surprise Question was 0.69 ((0.64 to 0.74) I<sup>2</sup>=97.2%), specificity 0.69 ((0.63 to 0.74) I<sup>2</sup>=99.7%), positive predictive value 0.40 ((0.35 to 0.45) I<sup>2</sup>=99.4%), negative predictive value 0.89 ((0.87 to 0.91) I<sup>2</sup>=99.7%) and accuracy 0.71 ((0.68 to 0.75) I<sup>2</sup>=99.3%). The prompt performed best in populations with high event rates, shorter timeframes and when posed to more experienced respondents.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The Surprise Question demonstrated modest accuracy with considerable heterogeneity across the population to which it was applied and to whom it was posed. Prospective studies should test whether the prompt can facilitate timely access to palliative care services, as originally envisioned.</p><p><strong>Prospero registration number: </strong>CRD32022298236.</p>","PeriodicalId":9136,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care","volume":" ","pages":"12-35"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11874281/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Surprise Question and clinician-predicted prognosis: systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Ankit Gupta, Ruth Burgess, Michael Drozd, John Gierula, Klaus Witte, Sam Straw\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/spcare-2024-004879\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The Surprise Question, 'Would you be surprised if this person died within the next year?' is a simple tool that can be used by clinicians to identify people within the last year of life. This review aimed to determine the accuracy of this assessment, across different healthcare settings, specialties, follow-up periods and respondents.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Searches were conducted of Medline, Embase, AMED, PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, from inception until 01 January 2024. Studies were included if they reported original data on the ability of the Surprise Question to predict survival. For each study (including subgroups), sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values and accuracy were determined.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our dataset comprised 56 distinct cohorts, including 68 829 patients. In a pooled analysis, the sensitivity of the Surprise Question was 0.69 ((0.64 to 0.74) I<sup>2</sup>=97.2%), specificity 0.69 ((0.63 to 0.74) I<sup>2</sup>=99.7%), positive predictive value 0.40 ((0.35 to 0.45) I<sup>2</sup>=99.4%), negative predictive value 0.89 ((0.87 to 0.91) I<sup>2</sup>=99.7%) and accuracy 0.71 ((0.68 to 0.75) I<sup>2</sup>=99.3%). The prompt performed best in populations with high event rates, shorter timeframes and when posed to more experienced respondents.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The Surprise Question demonstrated modest accuracy with considerable heterogeneity across the population to which it was applied and to whom it was posed. Prospective studies should test whether the prompt can facilitate timely access to palliative care services, as originally envisioned.</p><p><strong>Prospero registration number: </strong>CRD32022298236.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9136,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"12-35\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11874281/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/spcare-2024-004879\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/spcare-2024-004879","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:意外问题 "如果这个人在未来一年内死亡,您会感到意外吗?本综述旨在确定这一评估在不同医疗机构、专科、随访期和受访者中的准确性:对 Medline、Embase、AMED、PubMed 和 Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials 进行了检索,检索时间从开始到 2024 年 1 月 1 日。如果研究报告了 "令人惊讶的问题 "预测存活率能力的原始数据,则纳入该研究。每项研究(包括亚组)的灵敏度、特异性、阳性和阴性预测值以及准确性均已确定:我们的数据集由 56 个不同的队列组成,包括 68 829 名患者。在汇总分析中,惊喜问题的灵敏度为 0.69((0.64 至 0.74)I2=97.2%),特异性为 0.69((0.63 至 0.74)I2=99.7%),阳性预测值为 0.40((0.35 至 0.45)I2=99.4%),阴性预测值为 0.89((0.87 至 0.91)I2=99.7%),准确性为 0.71((0.68 至 0.75)I2=99.3%)。在事件发生率高、时间框架较短的人群中,以及在向更有经验的受访者提问时,该提示语的表现最佳:结论:"惊喜问题 "的准确性不高,但其适用人群和提问对象之间存在很大的异质性。前瞻性研究应检验该提示是否能像最初设想的那样促进及时获得姑息关怀服务:CRD32022298236。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Surprise Question and clinician-predicted prognosis: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: The Surprise Question, 'Would you be surprised if this person died within the next year?' is a simple tool that can be used by clinicians to identify people within the last year of life. This review aimed to determine the accuracy of this assessment, across different healthcare settings, specialties, follow-up periods and respondents.

Methods: Searches were conducted of Medline, Embase, AMED, PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, from inception until 01 January 2024. Studies were included if they reported original data on the ability of the Surprise Question to predict survival. For each study (including subgroups), sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values and accuracy were determined.

Results: Our dataset comprised 56 distinct cohorts, including 68 829 patients. In a pooled analysis, the sensitivity of the Surprise Question was 0.69 ((0.64 to 0.74) I2=97.2%), specificity 0.69 ((0.63 to 0.74) I2=99.7%), positive predictive value 0.40 ((0.35 to 0.45) I2=99.4%), negative predictive value 0.89 ((0.87 to 0.91) I2=99.7%) and accuracy 0.71 ((0.68 to 0.75) I2=99.3%). The prompt performed best in populations with high event rates, shorter timeframes and when posed to more experienced respondents.

Conclusions: The Surprise Question demonstrated modest accuracy with considerable heterogeneity across the population to which it was applied and to whom it was posed. Prospective studies should test whether the prompt can facilitate timely access to palliative care services, as originally envisioned.

Prospero registration number: CRD32022298236.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care
BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
7.40%
发文量
170
期刊介绍: Published quarterly in print and continuously online, BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care aims to connect many disciplines and specialties throughout the world by providing high quality, clinically relevant research, reviews, comment, information and news of international importance. We hold an inclusive view of supportive and palliative care research and we are able to call on expertise to critique the whole range of methodologies within the subject, including those working in transitional research, clinical trials, epidemiology, behavioural sciences, ethics and health service research. Articles with relevance to clinical practice and clinical service development will be considered for publication. In an international context, many different categories of clinician and healthcare workers do clinical work associated with palliative medicine, specialist or generalist palliative care, supportive care, psychosocial-oncology and end of life care. We wish to engage many specialties, not only those traditionally associated with supportive and palliative care. We hope to extend the readership to doctors, nurses, other healthcare workers and researchers in medical and surgical specialties, including but not limited to cardiology, gastroenterology, geriatrics, neurology, oncology, paediatrics, primary care, psychiatry, psychology, renal medicine, respiratory medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信