ArticleInternational journal of nephrology and renovascular disease2025
Detection of Financial Toxicity in Italian Uremic Patients: A Single Center Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in International journal of nephrology and renovascular disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Financial toxicity (FT) describes the strain individuals and families feel when they struggle with money due to medical expenses and related costs associated with their healthcare. Management of chronic kidney disease is expensive. The aim of this study was to detect FT in Italian patients undergoing renal replacement therapy. Patients and Methods: FT was investigated using the Patient-Reported Outcome for Fighting Financial Toxicity (PROFFIT) questionnaire in 238 individuals, of whom 147 (61.8%) received hemodialysis, 30 (12.6%) peritoneal dialysis, and 61 had renal transplantation (25.6%). The PROFFIT score was normalized to a 0-100% range, with 100% indicating the highest level of toxicity, and mean values were compared in the different groups of uremic patients stratified by age, sex and treatment. Results: Mean age of the population was 66.2±13.7 years (range 23-89). The probability of FT due to financial distress in the whole population that was 42.1±24.1%, whilst mean probability of FT due to medical expenses response was 44.9±27.6%, mean probability of FT due to transportation response was 37.1±29.4% and mean probability of FT due to support from the Health System was 25.5±23.3%. FT was higher in the hemodialysis group. Conclusion: Hemodialysis patients showed worse financial burden than peritoneal dialysis and kidney transplanted patients, while peritoneal dialysis subjects felt better cared for by health care professionals than kidney transplanted individuals, however the latter group could afford monthly expenses better than hemodialysis patients. Health care professionals should discuss financial problems or other social challenges that may impact on the health of uremic individuals.
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.