ArticleJournal of cancer & allied specialties2025
Urdu Translation and Validation of the COST-FACIT Tool for Assessing Financial Toxicity Among Patients Diagnosed with Cancer in Pakistan.
Article in Journal of cancer & allied specialties, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Cancer treatment can impose a significant financial burden on patients, impacting their quality of life. The COST-FACIT tool is commonly used to assess financial toxicity (FT) in cancer patients. This study aimed to translate and validate an Urdu version of the COST-FACIT tool in Pakistan. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional validation study was conducted at four tertiary care hospitals in Karachi, Pakistan, from October to December 2023. We translated and back-translated the 12-item COST-FACIT tool and validated it in accordance with FACIT guidelines. The study included 10 native Urdu-speaking cancer patients as recommended in the guidelines. The analysis included descriptive statistics, content validity indices, and assessment of internal consistency using Cronbach's alpha, analyzed with Stata MP v.14 software. Results: The study population included 6 females (60%) and 4 males (40%), with most participants aged between 40 and 60 years (4 patients, 40%). The mean FACIT COST score was 16.3 (SD = 11.255, range 4-40), with 6 (60%) patients experiencing moderate (Grade 2) financial toxicity. Internal consistency was good, with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.90, and content validity indices indicated items were relevant and clear (average expert CVI = 0.82 for relevance, 0.90 for clarity). Conclusion: We have translated and validated an Urdu version of the COST-FACIT tool. It is a valid and reliable instrument to assess financial toxicity experienced by cancer patients in Pakistan.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.