ArticleDose-response : a publication of International Hormesis Society2012
Cancer mortality, state mean elevations, and other selected predictors.
Article in Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis Society, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Land elevation and cancer mortality in u.s. Cities and counties using median elevations derived from geographic information systems.Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis Society · 2013Article
- Reduced Lung Cancer Mortality With Lower Atmospheric Pressure.Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis SocietyArticle
- Health Impacts of Low-Dose Ionizing Radiation: Current Scientific Debates and Regulatory Issues.Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis SocietyReview
- Influence of Individual Radiosensitivity on the Hormesis Phenomenon: Toward a Mechanistic Explanation Based on the Nucleoshuttling of ATM Protein.Dose-response : a publication of International Hormesis SocietyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This ecological inquiry compares cancer mortality rates in the U.S. to the predictor of natural background radiation (via land elevation means) along with eight other predictors thought to be associated with cancer mortality. Age-adjusted cancer mortality in 2006 was compared to the predictors of mean land elevation, percent of smokers, educational attainment, percent of population without health insurance, income, obesity, health perception, physical activity, and diet. Among the six predictors considered appropriate for multiple linear regression, three were found to be statistically significant; from strongest to weakest, these three were: smoking, land elevation, and educational attainment. The predictors of smoking and educational attainment have long been considered associated with cancer mortality. The finding that the predictor of land elevation / natural background radiation is inversely related to cancer mortality is another piece of evidence supporting the theory of radiation hormesis. In this study, land elevation / natural background radiation ranked second in predictive strength regarding cancer mortality, behind smoking and ahead of educational attainment. Since this is an ecological inquiry, no causal inferences can be made.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.