ArticleRisk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis2012
Chapter 12: Yale lung cancer model.
Article in Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predicting the Epidemiological Dynamics of Lung Cancer in Japan.Journal of clinical medicine · 2019Article
- Population impact of lung cancer screening in the United States: Projections from a microsimulation model.PLoS medicine · 2018Article
- Decreases in Smoking-Related Cancer Mortality Rates Are Associated with Birth Cohort Effects in Korean Men.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2016Article
- Chapter 13: CISNET lung models: comparison of model assumptions and model structures.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2012Article
- Chapter 6: Lung cancer in never smokers: epidemiology and risk prediction models.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2012Article
- Chapter 4: Development of the counterfactual smoking histories used to assess the effects of tobacco control.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2012Article
- Chapter 8: The FHCRC lung cancer model.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The age-period-cohort model is known to provide an excellent description of the temporal trends in lung cancer incidence and mortality. This analytic approach is extended to include the contribution of carcinogenesis models for smoking. Usefulness of this strategy is that it offers a way to temporally calibrate a model that is fitted to population data and it can be readily adopted for the consideration of many different models. In addition, it provides diagnostics that can suggest temporal limitations of a particular carcinogenesis model in describing population rates. Alternative carcinogenesis models can be embedded within this framework. The two-stage clonal expansion model is implemented here. The model was used to estimate the impact of tobacco control after dissemination of knowledge of the harmful effects of cigarette smoking by comparing the observed number of lung cancer deaths to those expected if there had been no control compared to an ideal of complete control in 1965. Results indicate that 35.2% and 26.5% of lung cancer deaths that could have been avoided actually were for males and females, respectively.
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.