ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Assessment of the financial toxicity in patients with differentiated thyroid cancer: a cross-sectional study in western China.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Using the Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) tool to measure financial toxicity (FT) among differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) patients in China and investigate the association between FT and psychological distress. Methods: We carried out a cross-sectional investigation of individuals who had survived DTC in two tertiary medical facilities. The assessment of FT was performed using the Chinese version of the COST tool. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Distress Thermometer (DT) was used to measure psychological distress. A multivariate logistic regression model was constructed to identify factors related to FT, and the Pearson correlation was used to evaluate the association between COST and DT scores. Results: Out of the 207 patients who participated in this study, the average COST score was 16.3. Notably, the prevalence of financial toxicity was 47.8% (95% CI: 41% ~ 54.7%) of the patients. Of these, 22.7% (47/207) were mild FT, 23.7% (49/207) were moderate FT, and 1.4% (3/207) were severe FT. Four variables were found to be associated with increased FT in the logistic regression model, younger age (odd ratio [OR], 4.52; Conclusion: In this study, the prevalence of FT in DTC patients was 47.8%. FT was associated with younger age, lower educational level, uninsured, had lower household income, and advanced cancer. Clinicians should identify patients by predictors early and conduct psychological interventions.
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.