Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22492832›Full record

SynthesisCancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology2012

Body mass index and colon cancer screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Nisa M Maruthur, Shari Bolen, Kimberly Gudzune, Frederick L Brancati, Jeanne M Clark

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Survivorship care plans and adherence to breast and cervical cancer screening guidelines among cancer survivors in a national sample.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Lower Utilization of Colorectal Cancer Screening Among Vegetarians, Adventist Health Study-2.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2022
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Metabolic syndrome and gastrointestinal cancers.Indian journal of gastroenterology : official journal of the Indian Society of Gastroenterology · 2019
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Time to Colonoscopy after Positive Fecal Blood Test in Four U.S. Health Care Systems.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2016
    Article
  18. Review
  19. The risk of colonic adenomas and colonic cancer in obesity.Best practice & research. Clinical gastroenterology · 2014
    Review
  20. Patterns of colorectal cancer screening uptake in newly eligible men and women.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2014
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Nisa M MaruthurDepartment of Medicine, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA. maruthur@jhmi.edu
Shari Bolen
Kimberly Gudzune
Frederick L Brancati
Jeanne M Clark

Funding

Institute for Clinical and Translational Research (KL2)KL2RR025006 · NCRR · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI FORD, DANIEL ERNEST · 2007 to 2011
$12.9M
BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH IN HEART &VASCULAR DISEASET32HL007180 · NHLBI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI MARUTHUR, NISA M · 1985 to 2020
$11.4M
JHU-UMD Diabetes Research CenterP30DK079637 · NIDDK · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI HUSSAIN, MEHBOOB A · 2013 to 2017
$9.7M
Case Western Reserve University/Cleveland Clinic CTSA (KL2)KL2RR024990 · NCRR · CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY · PI DAVIS, PAMELA B · 2007 to 2011
$9.5M
Diabetes Research and Training CenterP60DK079637 · NIDDK · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI WONDISFORD, FREDRIC E. · 2008 to 2012
$9.1M
Patient Oriented Research in Type 2 DiabetesK24DK062222 · NIDDK · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI BRANCATI, FREDERICK L · 2002 to 2011
$1.7M
NCRR NIH HHS 1KL2 RR024990NCRR NIH HHS 1KL2 RR025006NCRR NIH HHS KL2 RR024990NCRR NIH HHS KL2 RR025006NHLBI NIH HHS 5T32 HL007180NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL007180NIDDK NIH HHS K24 DK062222NIDDK NIH HHS K24 DK62222NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK079637NIDDK NIH HHS P60 DK079637PHS HHS T32 HP10025-16-00
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundObesity is associated with increased colon cancer mortality and lower rates of mammography and Pap testing.

methodsWe conducted a systematic review to determine whether obesity is associated with lower rates of colon cancer screening. We searched the PubMed, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library databases. Two investigators reviewed citations, abstracts, and articles independently. Two investigators abstracted study information sequentially and evaluated quality independently using standardized forms. We included all studies in our qualitative syntheses. We used random effects meta-analyses to combine those studies providing screening results by the following body mass index (BMI) categories: Normal, 18.5-24.9 kg/m(2) (reference); overweight, 25-29.9 kg/m(2); class I obesity, 30-34.9 kg/m(2); class II obesity, 35-39.9 kg/m(2); and class III obesity, ≥ 40 kg/m(2).

resultsOf 5,543 citations, we included 23 articles. Almost all studies were cross-sectional and ascertained BMI and screening through self-report. BMI was not associated with colon cancer screening overall. The subgroup of obese white women reported lower rates of colon cancer screening compared with those with a normal BMI with combined ORs (95% CI) of 0.87 (0.82-0.93), 0.80 (0.65-0.99), and 0.73 (0.58-0.94) for class I, II, and III obesity, respectively. Results were similar among white men with class II obesity.

conclusionsOverall, BMI was not associated with colon cancer screening. Obese white men and women may be less likely to undergo colon cancer screening compared with those with a normal BMI. IMPACT: Further investigation of this disparity may reduce the risk of obesity-related colon cancer death.

Indexed as

Body Mass IndexColonic NeoplasmsEarly Detection of CancerFemaleHumansMaleMass ScreeningObesitySex FactorsUnited StatesWhite People

Identifiers

PMID22492832
PMCPMC3930882

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.