ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2024
Evaluation of Financial Interventions in Breast Cancer Care Worldwide: A Systematic Review.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perceived barriers to timely diagnosis among Iranian women diagnosed with advanced breast cancer: a qualitative study.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Clinical and sociodemographic characteristics associated with health-related quality of life among older breast cancer survivors.Women's health (London, England)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Out-of-pocket costs are burdensome for breast cancer patients. Cost-reducing interventions, though implemented, have unclear comparative efficacy. This study aimed to critically evaluate characteristics of successful versus unsuccessful interventions designed to decrease out-of-pocket costs for breast cancer patients. Methods: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA checklist. Embase, PubMed, Global Index Medicus, and Global Health were queried from inception to February 2021. Articles describing a financial intervention targeting costs for breast cancer screening, diagnosis, or treatment and addressing clinical or patient-level financial outcomes were included. Methodological quality was evaluated using the QualSyst tool. Interventions were organized in accordance with timing of implementation, with narrative description of intervention type, success, and outcomes. Results: Of the 11,086 articles retrieved, 21 were included in this review. Of these, 14 consisted of interventions during screening, and seven during diagnosis or treatment. Free/subsidized screening mammography was the most common screening intervention; 91% of these programs documented successful outcomes. Patient navigation and gift voucher programs demonstrated mixed success. The most successful intervention implemented during diagnosis/treatment was reducing medication costs. Low-cost programs and direct patient financial assistance were also successful. Limitations included lack of standardization in outcome metrics across studies. Conclusions: Financial interventions reducing prices through free screening mammography and decreasing medication costs were most successful. Less successful interventions were not contextually tailored, including gift card incentivization and low-cost treatment modalities. These findings can facilitate implementation of broader, more generalizable programs to reduce costs and improve outcomes during evaluation and management of breast cancer.
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.