Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24167664›Full record

ArticleJournal of gynecologic oncology2013

Incidence of cervical, endometrial, and ovarian cancer in Korea, 1999-2010.

Myong Cheol Lim, Eun-Kyeong Moon, Aesun Shin, Kyu-Won Jung, Young-Joo Won, Sang Soo Seo, Sokbom Kang, Jae-Weon Kim, Joo-Young Kim, Sang-Yoon Park

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of gynecologic oncology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 71 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
71citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
8.5field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

71 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 110 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Guideline
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

11 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Myong Cheol LimCenter for Uterine Cancer, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Korea.
Eun-Kyeong Moon
Aesun Shin
Kyu-Won Jung
Young-Joo Won
Sang Soo Seo
Sokbom Kang
Jae-Weon Kim
Joo-Young Kim
Sang-Yoon Park
National Cancer Center · KRSeoul National University · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo investigate the recent incidence of and trends in cervical, endometrial, and ovarian cancer in Korean females.

methodsData from the Korea Central Cancer Registry between 1999 and 2010 were analyzed. Age-standardized rates (ASRs) and annual percent changes (APCs) were calculated.

resultsTHE ABSOLUTE INCIDENCE RATES OF THE THREE MAJOR GYNECOLOGIC CANCERS INCREASED: 6,394 in 1999 to 7,454 in 2010. The ASR for gynecologic cancer was 23.7 per 100,000 in 1999 and decreased to 21.0 in 2010 (APC, -1.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.53 to -0.70) due to a definitive decrease in the incidence of cervical cancer (APC, -4.3%). Endometrial cancer has been definitively increasing (APC, 6.9% during 1999-2010), especially in females <30 years old (APC, 11.2%) and in females ≥80 years old (APC, 9.5%). The incidence of ovarian cancer is increasing gradually (APC, 1.5%).

conclusionASRs and APC for gynecologic cancers overall are decreasing due to the decrease in the incidence of cervical cancer. However, the incidence of endometrial and ovarian cancer has been increasing.

Indexed as

CancerCervix uteriEndometriumKoreaOvary

Identifiers

PMID24167664
PMCPMC3805909
OpenAlexW2021825704

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.