ArticlePloS one2024
Validation of the COmprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) in Vietnamese patients with cancer.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Financial Toxicity in Women with Endometriosis: Psychometric Validation of the Polish COST-FACIT with Analysis of Demographic and Clinical Factors.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Validity, test-retest reliability, and responsiveness of the Indonesian version of FACIT-COST measure for subjective financial toxicity.Health and quality of life outcomes · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe COmprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) has proven to be a reliable tool for quantifying the impact of financial toxicity (FT) in patients with cancer in clinical and public health settings. However, the COST has not yet been validated in Vietnam. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate its reliability and validity among Vietnamese patients with cancer.
methodsA cross-sectional study was conducted in a sample of 300 patients with cancer aged 27-95 years (mean: 58.5±11.2) in a tertiary hospital. The COST was translated into Vietnamese and English and adjusted to suit the local culture. Reliability was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega coefficients. The construct and convergent validities were also assessed.
resultsThe COST demonstrated good internal consistency and reliability (Cronbach's alpha = 0.913; McDonald's omega = 0.915). The exploratory factor analysis revealed two factors that explained 64.9% of the variance. The adjusted fit indices indicated a good fit of the model (χ2 (39) = 67.78, p = 0.003; standardized root mean squared residual = 0.042; Tucker-Lewis index = 0.971; comparative fit index = 0.979; root mean square error of approximation = 0.061, 90% confidence interval = 0.035-0084). Higher COST scores were significantly correlated with higher health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L utility score: r = 0.21, p = 0.002; EQ VAS: r = 0.28, p < 0.001). Multivariate quantile regression analysis revealed that female sex, rural residence, and unstable job/unemployment were associated with lower COST scores. There was no statistically significant difference in other factors, including clinical factors (types of cancer, staging, and treatment modalities).
conclusionsThe COST is reliable and valid, making it suitable for assessing FT severity in Vietnamese patients with cancer.
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.