SynthesisInternational journal for equity in health2026
Prevalence and determinants of financial toxicity in patients with colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in International journal for equity in health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Financial toxicity among patients with lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- Mediating Role of Family Resilience and Avoidance Between Financial Toxicity and Quality of Life in Cancer Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study.Patient preference and adherence · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThis systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the global prevalence and determinants of financial toxicity in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients.
methodsPubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, PsycINFO, Cochrane, CINAHL, CNKI were searched through January 2025. Studies reporting financial toxicity scores, prevalence, or determinants were selected. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Methodological Checklist and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used to assess the article quality. Meta analyses were performed in R 4.2.5, with heterogeneity assessed by I2 test and subgroup analyses. Publication bias evaluated using funnel plots, Egger’s test and Luis Furuya-Kanamori index.
results65 studies met inclusion criteria. The pooled prevalence of objective financial toxicity (catastrophic health expenditure) was 0.69 (95% CI: 0.45–0.94). For COST-PROM scale studies, prevalence was 0.74 (95% CI: 0.58–0.90); for self-developed scales, prevalence was 0.31 (95% CI: 0.24–0.40). Female patients had a higher risk of financial toxicity (OR = 1.37) compared with male patients (OR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.53–0.99 for males). Younger patients (< 60 years) had a higher risk (OR = 2.13) compared with those aged ≥ 60 (OR = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.32–0.69 for ≥ 60 years). Insured patients had a higher risk compared with uninsured patients (OR = 1.88, 95% CI: 1.05–3.37). Unmarried patients had a higher risk (OR = 1.49) compared with married patients (OR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.48–0.93 for married). Patients with lower educational attainment had a higher risk (OR = 2.27) compared with those with high school education or above (OR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.37–0.53 for high education). Patients with stage IV cancer had a higher risk compared with stages I–III (OR = 1.32, 95% CI: 1.11–1.57). Only employment status and education level showed publication bias, and correction by trimming and filling did not change the conclusions.
conclusionFinancial toxicity is common among CRC patients. Higher risk was observed in females, younger patients, those with lower education, insured individuals, and patients with stage IV CRC. Interventions should target these vulnerable groups, highlighting that insurance alone may not fully protect against financial toxicity, and should strengthen financial support and social resources.
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.