Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 3, 2025

Implementation of a Real-Time Psychosis Risk Detection and Alerting System Based on Electronic Health Records using CogStack
Published on: May 15, 2020
Development and Validation of a Simplified Financial Toxicity Screening Tool for Use in Clinical Practice
Bridgette Thom1,2,3, Amy L Tin3, Fumiko Chino3
1University of North Carolina (UNC) School of Social Work, Chapel Hill, NC.
Purpose:
Cancer-related financial toxicity occurs frequently and is a key driver of inequities in access to care and disparities in treatment outcomes. Current practices to screen for financial toxicity are inconsistent because of the lack of a validated and clinically integrated screening tool. This analysis aimed to create and assess an abbreviated version of the validated Comprehensive Score for Financial Toxicity (COST) tool, a measure of financial toxicity used for research purposes, which could easily be added into often-lengthy clinical screening workflows.
Methods:
At an urban comprehensive cancer center with suburban satellite locations, a financial toxicity screening quality improvement project was conducted from June 2022 to August 2023 as part of routine clinical care: 57,526 longitudinal COST surveys were completed by 38,249 patients with cancer. An iterative algorithm selected the items with highest correlation with the total score. Using a separate validation data set, positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV, respectively) of the abbreviated tool (two-item) were assessed against the full COST score, with varying risk thresholds.
Results:
Inclusion of two COST questions (Q3: "I worry about the financial problems I will have in the future as a result of my illness or treatment"; Q6: "I am satisfied with my current financial situation") yielded a score that had a correlation of 0.922 with the full instrument score. For the two-item scale, PPV ranged from 74% to 91%, and NPV ranged from 91% to 98% when compared with the full COST tool.
Conclusion:
This analysis of a large data set finds that a simplified COST tool has high predictive value when compared with the full validated measure. An abbreviated COST measure of two questions is suitable for implementation into clinical screening workflows.

