ArticleDrug and alcohol dependence reports2026
The development of a patient-reported outcome measuring opioid use disorder financial toxicity: Establishing content validity and reliability.
Article in Drug and alcohol dependence reports, 2026. 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
Background: Financial barriers are a major obstacle to engagement in medication treatment for opioid use disorder (OUD), contributing to poor adherence, reduced quality of life, and psychological distress. Globally, the economic impact of substance use disorders, including OUD, strains health systems and individual finances alike, yet measurement of the patient-level financial impact remains underdeveloped. Financial toxicity captures the combined financial and psychosocial impact of treatment, yet no validated patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) exists for individuals receiving medications for OUD (MOUD). This study describes the development and preliminary validation of the Measuring Opioid Use Disorder Financial Toxicity (MOUD-FiT) PROM. Methods: The MOUD-FiT PROM was developed in three steps: (1) item generation via literature review, focus groups with adults receiving MOUD (n = 28 patients across 7 focus groups), and expert interviews (n = 5 treatment professionals); (2) content validation through cognitive debriefing with patients receiving MOUD (n = 7) and the Lawshe method with a panel of 30 lay experts (patients receiving MOUD); and (3) psychometric evaluation of internal consistency using the same 30 participants. Items were rated on a 5-point Likert scale, and analyses included inter-item and item-total correlations and Cronbach's α. The MOUD-FiT PROM requires approximately 5-10 min to complete. Results: The initial 96-item pool was reduced to 40 items following expert review and thematic classification (affect, coping, direct cost, indirect cost, support). Cognitive debriefing refined wording, and 18 items were excluded based on Lawshe content validity ratios. Further reduction for redundancy and low item-total correlations yielded a 15-item MOUD-FiT PROM. The final instrument showed excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α=0.90), with mean inter-item and item-total correlations of 0.38 and 0.59, respectively. Items included five affect, three coping, three direct-cost, and four indirect-cost items. Conclusions: The MOUD-FiT PROM demonstrates preliminary content validity and excellent reliability for assessing financial toxicity in patients receiving MOUD. As a development study, the current findings establish content validity and internal consistency; additional evaluation of construct and criterion validity, test-retest reliability, and factor structure is needed before broader implementation.
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.