SynthesisPloS one2014
Fish intake and ovarian cancer risk: a meta-analysis of 15 case-control and cohort studies.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association between dietary intake and risk of ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of nutrition · 2021Pooled it
- Fish Consumption and the Risk of Chronic Disease: An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses of Prospective Cohort Studies.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2020Pooled it
- The role of circadian disruption, sleep dysregulation, lifestyle factors, and metabolic reprogramming in the pathogenesis and progression of ovarian cancer.Journal of the National Cancer Center · 2026Review
- Fish consumption in multiple health outcomes: an umbrella review of meta-analyses of observational and clinical studies.Annals of translational medicine · 2023Article
- Review
- Pre-diagnosis diet and survival after a diagnosis of ovarian cancer.British journal of cancer · 2017Observational
- Lifestyle changes and the risk of developing endometrial and ovarian cancers: opportunities for prevention and management.International journal of women's health · 2016Review
- Impact of Lifestyle Interventions on Gynecologic Cancers: Beyond Diet and Exercise.American journal of lifestyle medicineReview
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrevious epidemiological studies have shown that fish consumption may modify the risk of ovarian cancer. However, these studies yielded controversial results. The present meta-analysis was undertaken to evaluate the relationship between fish intake and ovarian cancer risk.
methodsA literature search was carried out using Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library Central database for all relevant studies up to August 2013. We pooled the relative risks (RR) from individual studies using fixed-effect or random-effect model, and carried out heterogeneity and publication bias analyses.
resultsA total of 15 (ten case-control, and five cohort) studies were included in the present meta-analysis, representing data for 889,033 female subjects and 6,087 ovarian cancer cases. We found that total fish intake was not significantly associated with the risk of ovarian cancer among cohort studies (RR = 1.04 95% CI [0.89, 1.22]) as well as case-control studies (RR = 0.90, 95% CI [0.73,1.12]). There was no evidence of publication bias as suggested by Begg's test (P = 0.55) and Egger's test(P = 0.29).
conclusionsThe present meta-analysis showed that total fish consumption was not significantly associated with the risk of ovarian cancer. Further analysis on different fish species and food preparation methods should be conducted in future studies.
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.