ArticleBMJ open2026
Oncologists' insights and solutions on navigating financial toxicity: an exploratory study in Pakistan.
Article in BMJ open, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveFinancial toxicity (FT) poses a major challenge in cancer treatment. This study aimed to explore oncologists' attitudes towards FT, the barriers they face in managing it and potential solutions.
designThe study employed an exploratory qualitative design using inductive thematic analysis.
settingThe study was conducted at two tertiary care hospitals in Bahawalpur, Pakistan.
participantsThirteen oncologists were approached; 12 participated. Purposive sampling was used to select the participants. Eligible participants were all licensed oncologists who signed a written consent form and possessed at least 1 year of oncology experience.
resultFour themes emerged: the oncologist's role in addressing FT, the impact of FT on patient outcomes, barriers in discussing FT and proposed solutions. Participants acknowledged that oncologists have a critical role in addressing FT in patients through cost-effective treatment planning and counselling. However, several challenges make it difficult to discuss FT. The oncologists advocate including financial counselling services in treatment, expanding coverage of the Sehat Sahulat Program, improving healthcare infrastructure and regulating cancer drug prices to mitigate FT.
conclusionsFT is a multidimensional problem that requires systemic reforms rather than relying solely on oncologists. Future studies should involve patients and various stakeholders across different areas to explore FT and develop context-specific interventions for cancer care more comprehensively.
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.