ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2026
Constructing the scale to measure financial toxicity in cancer patients for Low-middle income countries (FT-LM) by using the modified Delphi method.
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLower socioeconomic status is associated with increased incidence and poorer treatment outcomes among cancer patients. Most of the studies related to financial toxicity have been done in high income countries and hence tools to capture the same are not relevant to our context. This study incorporated multiple cancer hospitals of Nepal with an intent to develop a scale for assessing the financial toxicity in cancer patients in Low middle income countries (LMICs), recognizing a gap in existing literature and measurement tools predominantly developed for high income countries.
methodsThe study employed a modified Delphi method to develop and finalize the financial toxicity scale. A series of questionnaires or 'rounds' were used to gather information in a very organised way. Rounds are held until group consensus is reached. The robustness of the final items and scale in effectively capturing the financial distress in cancer patients was evaluated by descriptive statistical analyses (Interquartile Range ≤ 1, and Level of Agreement ≥ 75%), content validity analysis (I-CVI ≥ 0.78) and Kendall's Coefficient of Concordance analysis using SPSS software version 27.
resultsThrough three rounds of modified Delphi surveys and retaining only the items that fulfilled the statistical criteria, a scale with 18 items was constructed. The agreement level increased substantially from the first to the third round suggesting a more uniform agreement among the experts for the scale with Kendall's Coefficient of Concordance analysis (X2 (17, N = 42) = 436.859, W = 0.612, p < 0.01) after third round. The constructed scale comprised of 18 items organized into five overarching thematic areas: "Affordability of treatment", "Compromising on family needs", "Compromising on treatment", "Mental stress" and "Leaving treatment due to financial issues".
conclusionEmploying qualitative and quantitative methods, the study used extensive literature reviews, expert opinions, and Delphi surveys to develop a scale for measuring financial toxicity. Notably, the practical implications of this study extend to various stakeholders, offering valuable insights for cancer treating institutes, and policymakers to look for essential mitigation strategies relating to financial distress in cancer patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42850339What 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.