Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24682372›Full record

SynthesisJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2014

Red meat consumption and stomach cancer risk: a meta-analysis.

Peng Song, Ming Lu, Qin Yin, Lei Wu, Dong Zhang, Bo Fu, Baolin Wang, Qinghong Zhao

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
7.9field-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

23 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. A summary of meat intakes and health burdens.European journal of clinical nutrition · 2018
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Microbial carcinogenic toxins and dietary anti-cancer protectants.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2017
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Peng SongDepartment of General Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, 121 Jiangjiayuan Road, Nanjing, 210011, China, pengsong90@126.com.
Ming Lu
Qin Yin
Lei Wu
Dong Zhang
Bo Fu
Baolin Wang
Qinghong Zhao
Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University · CNJiangsu Province Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe association of red meat consumption with the risk of stomach cancer has been reported by many studies, with inconclusive results. We performed a meta-analysis of cohort and case-control studies to provide a quantitative assessment of this association.

methodsRelevant studies were identified by searching PubMed and Embase before December 2013 without restrictions. A total of 18 studies involving 1,228,327 subjects were included in this meta-analysis. Summary relative risks were estimated using random effects models.

resultsThe pooled relative risks of gastric cancer were 1.37 (95 % CI 1.18-1.59) for the highest versus lowest categories of red meat intake with significant heterogeneity among studies (P(heterogeneity) < 0.001, I(2) = 67.6 %). When stratified by the study design, the significant associations were observed in population-based case-control studies (RR 1.58; 95 % CI 1.22-2.06; P(heterogeneity) < 0.001, I(2) = 73.0 %) and hospital-based case-control studies (RR 1.63; 95 % CI 1.38-1.92; P(heterogeneity) = 0.284, I(2) = 19.1 %). However, no association was observed among cohort studies (RR 1.00; 95 % CI 0.83-1.20; P(heterogeneity) = 0.158, I(2) = 33.9 %). The significant association was also presented in the subgroup analysis by geographic area (Asia, Europe), publication year (≥2000), sample size (<1,000, ≥1,000) and quality score (<7 stars, ≥7 stars). The dose-response analysis associated every 100 g/day increment in red meat intake with a 17 % increased gastric cancer risk (RR 1.17; 95 % CI 1.05-1.32). A linear regression model further revealed that the risk of gastric cancer increased with increasing level of red meat consumption.

conclusionsIncreased intake of red meat might be a risk factor for stomach cancer. Further larger prospective studies are warranted to verify this association.

Indexed as

DietCase-Control StudiesHumansMeatPrognosisRisk FactorsStomach Neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID24682372
PMCPMC11823590
OpenAlexW2053016232

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.