Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23416446›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of epidemiology2013

Invited commentary: reproductive organ surgeries and breast cancer risk--apples, oranges, or fruit cocktail?

David J Press, Leslie Bernstein

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComment
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of epidemiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 85% of its field
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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

David J PressCancer Prevention Institute of California, 2201 Walnut Avenue, Suite 300, Fremont, CA 94538, USA. david.press@ago.org
Leslie Bernstein
Cancer Prevention Institute of California · US

Funding

Research and Mentoring on Energetic Factors and Cancer: Established InvestigatorK05CA136967 · NCI · BECKMAN RESEARCH INSTITUTE/CITY OF HOPE · PI BERNSTEIN, LESLIE · 2009 to 2013
$684k
NCI NIH HHS HHSN261201000140CNCI NIH HHS K05 CA136967
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Case-control and cohort studies are almost always complicated by nonrandom exposure allocation, which must be minimized in the design and analysis phases. Tubal sterilization is a common gynecological procedure that may be associated with other reproductive organ surgeries, which in turn may be associated with breast cancer risk. In this issue of the Journal, Gaudet et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2013;177(6):492-499) argue successfully that tubal sterilization is unassociated with breast cancer risk. Scrutiny of the heterogeneous studies included in their meta-analysis underscores the role of confounding and effect modification in observational epidemiologic studies. Specifically, tubal sterilization is unassociated with breast cancer risk, but either oophorectomy or hysterectomy, or both, and the timing of these procedures warrant careful consideration in the design, analysis, and interpretation of observational research on reproductive factors.

Indexed as

Sterilization, TubalBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumans

Identifiers

PMID23416446
PMCPMC3657528
OpenAlexW2171211221

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.