ArticleInternational journal of cancer2014
Cross-space-time clustering of childhood cancer in Great Britain: evidence for a common aetiology.
Article in International journal of cancer, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evidence of spatial clustering of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia cases in Greater Mexico City: report from the Mexican Inter-Institutional Group for the identification of the causes of childhood leukemia.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Childhood cancer research in Oxford II: The Childhood Cancer Research Group.British journal of cancer · 2018Article
- Childhood and Adolescence Cancers in the Palermo Province (Southern Italy): Ten Years (2003⁻2012) of Epidemiological Surveillance.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Article
- Childhood cancer in small geographical areas and proximity to air-polluting industries.Environmental research · 2017Article
- Population mixing for leukaemia, lymphoma and CNS tumours in teenagers and young adults in England, 1996-2005.BMC cancer · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Previously, we identified space-time clustering in certain childhood cancers. This study aimed to determine whether there was cross-space-time clustering between different diagnostic groups. A total of 32,295 cases were diagnosed during 1969-1993. Cross-space-time clustering was analyzed by a second-order procedure based on Diggle's method. Locations were birth and diagnosis addresses. The following space-time combinations were examined: address and date of birth; address at birth and date of diagnosis; address and date of diagnosis. Cross-space-time clustering analyses considered clustering pairs of cases from two different diagnostic groups. Formal statistical significance was taken as p < 0.00067 and marginal significance 0.01 > p ≥ 0.00067. Based on address at birth and date of diagnosis, there was statistically significant cross-clustering between cases of HL and intracranial and intraspinal embryonal tumors (IIET), both aged 0-14 years (p < 0.0001). Based on address and date of birth, there was marginally significant cross-clustering between cases of lymphoid leukemia (LL) aged 5-14 years and Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) aged 0-14 years (p = 0.0019). Based on address and date of diagnosis there was marginally significant cross-clustering between cases of LL aged 1-4 years and soft tissue sarcoma (STS) aged 0-14 years (p = 0.0041). Findings from this study are consistent with possible common aetiological factors between different diagnostic groups. They suggest a common aetiology for the following pairs of diagnostic groups: HL and IIET; older cases of LL and HL; younger cases of LL and STS. The possibility of common infectious mechanisms should be explored.
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.