ArticleBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2010
UK cancer survival statistics.
Article in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cancer disparities: an extensive review.Ecancermedicalscience · 2026Review
- Incidence and survival of uveal melanoma in Northern Ireland: how incomplete data can skew results in rare cancers.Eye (London, England) · 2023Article
- Five ways to improve international comparisons of cancer survival: lessons learned from ICBP SURVMARK-2.British journal of cancer · 2022Article
- Understanding breast cancer as a global health concern.The British journal of radiology · 2022Article
- The Role of AMPK Activation for Cardioprotection in Doxorubicin-Induced Cardiotoxicity.Cardiovascular drugs and therapy · 2020Review
- Critical Points for Interpreting Patients' Survival Rate Using Cancer Registries: A Literature Review.Journal of epidemiology · 2018Review
- miR-486 functions as a tumor suppressor in esophageal cancer by targeting CDK4/BCAS2.Oncology reports · 2018Article
- Parameter Heterogeneity In Breast Cancer Cost Regressions - Evidence From Five European Countries.Health economics · 2015Article
- Primary non-hodgkin lymphoma of lateral skull base mimicking a trigeminal schwannoma: case report.International journal of clinical and experimental medicine · 2015Article
- Concordance of National Cancer Registration with self-reported breast, bowel and lung cancer in England and Wales: a prospective cohort study within the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening.British journal of cancer · 2013Article
- Management of colorectal cancer explains differences in 1-year relative survival between France and England for patients diagnosed 1997-2004.British journal of cancer · 2013Article
- A comprehensive assessment of the impact of errors in the cancer registration process on 1- and 5-year relative survival estimates.British journal of cancer · 2013Article
- Completeness of case ascertainment and survival time error in English cancer registries: impact on 1-year survival estimates.British journal of cancer · 2011Article
- Evidence against the proposition that "UK cancer survival statistics are misleading": simulation study with National Cancer Registry data.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2011Article
- Interval cancers in the NHS breast cancer screening programme in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.British journal of cancer · 2011Article
- Cancer survival in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, and the UK, 1995-2007 (the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership): an analysis of population-based cancer registry data.Lancet (London, England) · 2011Article
- Predictors of early death in female patients with breast cancer in the UK: a cohort study.BMJ open · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Comment on
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.
Indexed as
Identifiers
20702551What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.