ArticleBMC psychology2026
Development and validation of the subjective financial distress scale for cancer patients.
Article in BMC psychology, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeGrounded in Chinese healthcare and cultural background, this study aimed to develop and validate the Subjective Financial Distress Scale (SFDS) for cancer patients.
methodsBetween July and November 2022, cancer patients were recruited from the oncology department of a Grade A hospital in Jiangsu Province by the convenience sampling method. This research was conducted in three stages: Phase I (Item development) included domain identification and item generation based on a systematic literature review and preliminary qualitative interview results. Phase Ⅱ (Scale development) reduced items through Delphi expert consultation, a pilot test, item analysis and exploratory factor analysis. Phase III (Scale validation) evaluated the reliability and stability of the scale.
resultsA total of 452 patients were recruited. The final scale consisted of 24 items with 6 dimensions, including financial risk perception, changes in daily consumption patterns, changes in work status, changes in treatment plans, individual spontaneous emotional experiences and externally mediated interactive reactions. The scale's Cronbach's alpha, split-half reliability, test-retest reliability and content validity were 0.949, 0.902, 0.953 and 0.970, respectively. Comparison with the Comprehensive Scores for Financial Toxicity Based on the Patient-Reported Outcome Measures showed high calibration correlation validity (coefficient = 0.805). Confirmatory factor analysis showed that the first-order and second-order models both fit well, respectively.
conclusionThe SFDS is reliable and valid to assess the degree of the subjective financial distress in cancer patients.
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.