ArticleEpidemiology and health2014
Methodological issues for determining intervals of subsequent cancer screening.
Article in Epidemiology and health, 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.
- Quantifying the duration of the preclinical detectable phase in cancer screening: a systematic review.Epidemiology and health · 2022Pooled it
- Efficacy, safety and variability in pharmacotherapy for adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: a meta-analysis and meta-regression in over 9000 patients.Psychopharmacology · 2016Pooled it
- Optimizing breast cancer screening strategies for women with different BMI levels in Ghana: A simulation-based study on BMI-dependent tumor growth model.PLOS global public health · 2025Article
- Baseline and annual repeat rounds of screening: implications for optimal regimens of screening.European radiology · 2018Article
- Optimal Interval for Repeated Gastric Cancer Screening in Normal-Risk Healthy Korean Adults: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Cancer research and treatment · 2015Article
- Rates of change to a positive result in subsequent screening mammography in Korean women: a retrospective observational study.Journal of preventive medicine and public health = Yebang Uihakhoe chi · 2015Observational
- Endoscopic gastric cancer screening and surveillance in high-risk groups.Clinical endoscopy · 2014Review
- Narrative reviews.Epidemiology and health · 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The gap between nationwide recommendations of cancer screening and the related evidences obtained from Korean adults should be filled. Estimation of the mean sojourn time (MST) in a specific cancer is important to determine the intervals of subsequent screening. This author arranged the methods for calculating MST into 5 categories based on the parameters used. Under the legal barrier for protection of individual privacy and confidentiality in a Korean academic situation, the methods involving the use of transition rates or prevalence/incidence ratio would be applicable among these methods.
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.