ArticlePloS one2014
Association between socioeconomic factors and cancer risk: a population cohort study in Scotland (1991-2006).
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Socioeconomic inequalities in cancer incidence in Europe: a comprehensive review of population-based epidemiological studies.Radiology and oncology · 2020Pooled it
- Five year mortality in an RCT of a lung cancer biomarker to select people for low dose CT screening.PloS one · 2025Trial
- Earlier diagnosis of lung cancer in a randomised trial of an autoantibody blood test followed by imaging.The European respiratory journal · 2021Trial
- Chronic Illnesses: Varied Health Patterns and Mental Health Challenges.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Causal associations between socioeconomic status and prostate cancer using two-sample Mendelian randomization study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Effect of Regional Housing Hardship on Spatial Variation in Cancer Incidence: Does Housing Stress Increase Cancer Incidence?GeoHealth · 2024Article
- Individual and joint effect of socioeconomic status and lifestyle factors on cancer in Korea.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Housing and Cardiometabolic Risk Among Older Renters and Homeowners.Housing studies · 2023Article
- Comorbidity as a predictor of racial and ethnic disparities in cancer in the United States population.Public health in practice (Oxford, England) · 2021Article
- Lung, Breast and Colorectal Cancer Incidence by Socioeconomic Status in Spain: A Population-Based Multilevel Study.Cancers · 2021Article
- Socio-Economic Position, Cancer Incidence and Stage at Diagnosis: A Nationwide Cohort Study in Belgium.Cancers · 2021Article
- Assessment of the Risk of Oral Cancer Incidence in A High-Risk Population and Establishment of A Predictive Model for Oral Cancer Incidence Using A Population-Based Cohort in Taiwan.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Article
- The relation between household income and surgical outcome in the Dutch setting of equal access to and provision of healthcare.PloS one · 2018Article
- Socio-economic inequalities in the incidence of four common cancers: a population-based registry study.Public health · 2018Article
- Socio-economic deprivation: a significant determinant affecting stage of oral cancer diagnosis and survival.BMC cancer · 2016Article
- Article
- Article
- Time trends in socioeconomic inequalities in cancer mortality: results from a 35 year prospective study in British men.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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLung and upper aero-digestive tract (UADT) cancer risk are associated with low socioeconomic circumstances and routinely measured using area socioeconomic indices. We investigated effect of country of birth, marital status, one area deprivation measure and individual socioeconomic variables (economic activity, education, occupational social class, car ownership, household tenure) on risk associated with lung, UADT and all cancer combined (excluding non melanoma skin cancer).
methodsWe linked Scottish Longitudinal Study and Scottish Cancer Registry to follow 203,658 cohort members aged 15+ years from 1991-2006. Relative risks (RR) were calculated using Poisson regression models by sex offset for person-years of follow-up.
results21,832 first primary tumours (including 3,505 lung, 1,206 UADT) were diagnosed. Regardless of cancer, economically inactivity (versus activity) was associated with increased risk (male: RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.10-1.18; female: RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.02-1.11). For lung cancer, area deprivation remained significant after full adjustment suggesting the area deprivation cannot be fully explained by individual variables. No or non degree qualification (versus degree) was associated with increased lung risk; likewise for UADT risk (females only). Occupational social class associations were most pronounced and elevated for UADT risk. No car access (versus ownership) was associated with increased risk (excluding all cancer risk, males). Renting (versus home ownership) was associated with increased lung cancer risk, UADT cancer risk (males only) and all cancer risk (females only). Regardless of cancer group, elevated risk was associated with no education and living in deprived areas.
conclusionsDifferent and independent socioeconomic variables are inversely associated with different cancer risks in both sexes; no one socioeconomic variable captures all aspects of socioeconomic circumstances or life course. Association of multiple socioeconomic variables is likely to reflect the complexity and multifaceted nature of deprivation as well as the various roles of these dimensions over the life course.
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.