ArticleInternational journal of cancer2016
A novel method for identifying settings for well-motivated ecologic studies of cancer.
Article in International journal of cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Descriptive epidemiology of cutaneous melanoma - A treasure for generating hypotheses.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A low within-country variability and a large between-country variability in cancer incidence may indicate that ecologic factors are involved in the etiology of the disease. The aim of this study is to explore the within- and between-country variability of cancer incidence to motivate high-quality ecologic studies. We extracted age-standardized incidence rate estimates (world standard population) from 135 regions for the ten most frequent invasive cancers in Europe for non-Hispanic white populations from Cancer Incidence in Five Continents, Volume X. We fitted weighted multilevel Poisson regression models with random country effects for each cancer and sex. We estimated intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). A high ICC indicates a low within- and a high between-country variability of rates. The two cancer sites with the highest ICC among men were prostate cancer (0.96, 95% CI: 0.92-0.99) and skin melanoma (0.78, 0.64-0.93). Among women, high ICCs were observed for lung cancer (0.84, 0.73-0.95) and breast cancer (0.80, 0.69-0.91). The two most prominent sex differences for ICC occurred for cancers of the head and neck (men: 0.70, 0.55-0.85, women: 0.19, 0.08-0.30) and breast cancer (men: 0.04, 0.01-0.07, women: 0.80, 0.69-0.91). ICCs were relatively low for pancreatic cancer (men: 0.23, 0.10-0.35; women: 0.13, 0.04-0.21) and leukemia (men: 0.12, 0.04-0.21; women: 0.08, 0.02-0.14). For cancers with high ICC for which systematic factors of the health care system, screening and diagnostic activities are not plausible explanations for between-country variations in incidence, cross-country sex-specific ecologic studies may be especially promising.
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.