CARE Tool Study Aim 3

Patient's comprehensive score for financial toxicity (COST)

COST will be calculated by the sum of 11-items according to the validated measure. The items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale as follows: 0-Not at all, 1-A little bit, 2-Somewhat, 3-Quite a bit, and 4-Very much. Total possible range is 0-44 and the lower the score indicates greater financial toxicity. Scores will be summarized using means and 95% confidence intervals. Changes between timepoints will be analyzed by a two-sample t-test.

Patient's score of self-efficacy for communicating about care costs measured with the Decision Self-Efficacy Scale

The measure of self-efficacy for communicating about care costs is adapted from the validated tool Decision Self-Efficacy Scale. The Decision Self-Efficacy Scale measures self-confidence or belief in one's abilities in decision making, including shared decision making. Three-items from the Decision Self-Efficacy Scale will be used to measure self-efficacy for communicating about care costs. The three items will be measured by a 3-point Likert scale as follows: 0-Not Confident, 2-A Little Confident, and 4-A lot confident. A higher score indicates greater self-efficacy in decision making. The total score will be calculated according to the validated measure. Scores will be summarized using means and 95% confidence intervals. Changes between timepoints will be analyzed by a two-sample t-test.

Patient's health insurance literacy measure (HILM) score

HILM score is calculated from a 6-item questionnaire according to the validated measure. Each item is measured by a 4-point Likert scale as follows: 1-Not at all confident, 2-Slightly confident, 3-Moderately confident, and 4-Very confident. Total possible range is 0-100 where 0 represents the lowest possible health insurance literacy level (more difficulty navigating insurance) and 100 represents the highest (more confidence in choosing/using insurance). Scores will be summarized using means and 95% confidence intervals. Changes between timepoints will be analyzed by a two-sample t-test.

Patient's reported adherence to therapy & delayed care

Patient reported delayed care will be calculated from responses to three-items adapted from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). The three items have four categorical answers: Yes, No, I don't know, and Prefer not to answer. Scores will be summarized using frequencies. Changes between timepoints will be analyzed using sample proportions and 95% Clopper-Pearson Confidence Intervals. Changes between timepoints will be analyzed by a Pearson Chi-square test. .

Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM) - Adapted

FIM will be assessed by implementation champions' response to a single item from the FIM measure on the initial and follow up survey. FIM is measured by a 5-point Likert scale: 1-Completely disagree, 2-Disagree, 3-Neither agree nor Disagree, 4-Agree, or 5-Completely agree. A higher score indicates greater feasibility of the intervention in practice. Outcome will be summarized using means and 95% confidence intervals. Changes between surveys will be analyzed by a two-sample t-test.

Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM) - Adapted

AIM will be assessed by implementation champions' response to a single item from the AIM measure on the initial and follow up survey. AIM is measured by a 5-point Likert scale: 1-Completely disagree, 2-Disagree, 3-Neither agree nor Disagree, 4-Agree, or 5-Completely agree. A higher score indicates greater acceptability by subjects of the intervention. Outcome will be summarized using means and 95% confidence intervals. Changes between surveys will be analyzed by a two-sample t-test.

Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM) - Adapted

IAM will be assessed by implementation champions' response to a single item from the IAM measure on the initial and follow up survey. IAM is measured by a 5-point Likert scale: 1-Completely disagree, 2-Disagree, 3-Neither agree nor Disagree, 4-Agree, or 5-Completely agree. A higher score indicates greater appropriateness of the intervention. Outcome will be summarized using means and 95% confidence intervals. Changes between surveys will be analyzed by a two-sample t-test.

Organizational Readiness-Adapted

Organizational readiness will be assessed by implementation champions' response to 6 items adapted from the MORE measure for organizational readiness and 3 items adapted from the organizational readiness for implementing change (ORIC) measure. MORE items are measured on a 4-point Likert scale: 1-Not willing, 2-Somewhat willing, 3-Willing, and 4-Very willing. A higher score indicates greater organizational readiness. ORIC items are measured on a 5-point Likert scale: 1-Disagree, 2-Somewhat Disagree, 3-Neither agree nor Disagree, 4-Somewhat Agree, or 5-Agree. A higher score indicates greater organizational readiness to implement change. Changes between surveys will be analyzed by a two-sample t-test.