SynthesisPloS one2013
Parity and risk of colorectal cancer: a dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Parity and All-cause Mortality in Women and Men: A Dose-Response Meta-Analysis of Cohort Studies.Scientific reports · 2016Pooled it
- Parity and gastric cancer risk: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies.Scientific reports · 2016Pooled it
- Saturated, Monounsaturated and Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids Intake and Risk of Pancreatic Cancer: Evidence from Observational Studies.PloS one · 2015Pooled it
- A prospective investigation of early-onset colorectal cancer risk factors-pooled analysis of three large-scale European cohorts.British journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Reproductive Factors and Colorectal Cancer Risk: A Population-Based Case-Control Study.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2022Article
- Risk factors for early-onset colorectal cancer: a population-based case-control study in Ontario, Canada.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2021Article
- Hormone receptor expression of colorectal cancer diagnosed during the peri-partum period.Endocrine connections · 2019Article
- The Family Life Course and Health: Partnership, Fertility Histories, and Later-Life Physical Health Trajectories in Australia.Demography · 2016Article
- The utility of web mining for epidemiological research: studying the association between parity and cancer risk.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2016Article
- Menstrual and Reproductive Factors and Risk of Gastric and Colorectal Cancer in Spain.PloS one · 2016Article
- Fetal growth and subsequent maternal risk of colorectal cancer.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAssociation between parity and colorectal cancer (CRC) risk has been investigated by several epidemiological studies but results are controversial, yet a comprehensive and quantitative assessment of this association has not been reported so far.
methodsRelevant published studies of parity and CRC were identified using MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science databases through end of April 2013. Two authors independently assessed eligibility and extracted data. Eleven prospective studies reported relative risk (RR) estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of CRC risk associated with parity. We pooled the RR from individual studies using fixed- or random-effects models and carried out heterogeneity and publication bias analyses.
resultsThe summary RR for the ever parity vs. nulliparous was 0.95 (95% CI: 0.88-1.02), with no heterogeneity (Q = 9.04, P = 0.443, I (2) = 0.5%). Likewise, no significant association was yielded for the highest vs. lowest parity number (RR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.89-1.17), with moderate heterogeneity (Q = 17.48, P = 0.094, I (2) = 37.1%). Dose-response analysis still indicated no effect of parity on CRC risk and the summary RR of per one livebirth was 0.99 (95% CI: 0.96-1.02), with moderate of heterogeneity (Q = 16.50, P<0.021, I (2) = 57.6%). Similar results were observed among all the subgroup analyses. No evidence of publication bias and significant heterogeneity between subgroups were detected by meta-regression analyses.
conclusionResults of this dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies found that there was little evidence of an association between parity and CRC risk.
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.