Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25232394›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical and experimental medicine2014

Red and processed meat intake and risk of bladder cancer: a meta-analysis.

Fei Li, Shengli An, Lina Hou, Pengliang Chen, Chengyong Lei, Wanlong Tan

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical and experimental medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. A summary of meat intakes and health burdens.European journal of clinical nutrition · 2018
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Review
  8. Dietary Pattern and Cancer.Cancer treatment and research · 2024
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Mutational Landscape and Environmental Effects in Bladder Cancer.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020
    Review
  15. Epidemiology of Bladder Cancer.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Dietary factors associated with bladder cancer.Investigative and clinical urology · 2016
    Review
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Fei LiDepartment of Urology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University Guangzhou, Guangdong 510515, P. R. China.
Shengli AnDepartment of Biostatistics, School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, Southern Medical University Guangzhou, Guangdong 510515, P. R. China.
Lina HouDepartment of Healthy Management, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University Guangzhou, Guangdong 510515, P. R. China.
Pengliang ChenDepartment of Urology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University Guangzhou, Guangdong 510515, P. R. China.
Chengyong LeiDepartment of Urology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University Guangzhou, Guangdong 510515, P. R. China.
Wanlong TanDepartment of Urology, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University Guangzhou, Guangdong 510515, P. R. China.
Southern Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Findings from epidemiologic studies concerning red and processed meat intake and bladder cancer risk remain conflicting. Thus, we conducted this meta-analysis to examine the associations of red and processed meat intake with bladder cancer. Eligible studies published up to May 2014 were retrieved via both computer searches and review of references. Finally, we identified 14 studies on red meat (involving 9,084 cases) and 11 studies on processed meat (7,562 cases) involving up to 1,558,848 individuals. Random-effects models were used to estimate summary relative risk estimates (SRRE) based on high vs. low intake, and heterogeneity between study results was explored through stratified analyses on the basis of red/processed meat category, gender, study design and geographical region. Overall, the SRRE for all studies regarding red meat intake was 1.15 (95% CI: 0.97-1.36). Significant positive association was observed between processed meat consumption and bladder cancer (SRRE = 1.22; 95% CI: 1.04-1.43). Interestingly, increased by 25% and 33% risk of bladder cancer were observed for red meat and processed meat intake respectively in populations from the American continent. In conclusion, our fi ndings showed that there was an absence of an association between red meat intake and bladder cancer, but suggested that high consumption of processed meat probably correlated with rising risk of bladder cancer. In addition, positive relationships were observed regarding people intake of red and processed meat in the American continent. These findings need to be confirmed in future research.

Indexed as

Bladder cancerepidemiologymeatmeta-analysisnutrition

Identifiers

PMID25232394
PMCPMC4161554
OpenAlexW1802140135

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.