ArticleBMJ open2025
Financial catastrophe and its associated factors among chronic kidney disease patients undergoing haemodialysis in Kathmandu, Nepal: a mixed-method study.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A multi-systemic ethical dilemma model in hemodialysis patients: a qualitative study.BMC medical ethics · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe study aimed to assess the prevalence of financial catastrophe and explore patients' perceived effectiveness of the government support programme related to chronic kidney disease.
designCross-sectional mixed-method study.
participantsA total of 120 patients receiving free regular haemodialysis under the government's Deprived Citizen Support Programme for at least 6 months were included in the quantitative study, and 9 patients participated in the qualitative study.
main outcome measuresPrevalence of financial catastrophe and factors associated with financial catastrophe among chronic kidney disease patients undergoing haemodialysis.
methodsA convergent parallel mixed-method approach was carried out from 15 June to 15 December 2024, among chronic kidney disease patients undergoing haemodialysis at the National Kidney Center. Quantitative data were collected through face-to-face interviews using a semi-structured questionnaire. Financial catastrophe was defined as out-of-pocket (OOP) healthcare payments ≥40% of a household's disposable income, following the WHO-recommended threshold for severe financial burden. OOP expenditures were assessed over 6 months, and associations were tested using χ
resultsThe prevalence of financial catastrophe was 72.5%. The factors associated with financial catastrophe were the presence of complications (adjusted OR (AOR): 3.67, 95% CI 1.019 to 13.27), patients without financial support (AOR: 2.77, 95% CI 1.016 to 7.56) and reduction in food expenses (AOR: 0.313, 95% CI 0.109 to 0.896). Qualitative findings on awareness regarding government subsidies, financial strain, barriers to receiving treatment and perceived effectiveness of the programme revealed key aspects of utilisation and effectiveness of the government support programme.
conclusionThe prevalence of financial catastrophe was substantially high, which highlights the importance of addressing economic challenges in chronic kidney disease care. The study emphasised the need to strengthen financial protection through the expansion of government subsidies and improved insurance coverage.
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.