ArticleAmerican journal of men's health2017
Don't Change Much.
Article in American journal of men's health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- The burden of ambient air pollution on years of life lost from ischaemic heart disease in Pudong new area, Shanghai.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- An Economic Evaluation of 'Sheds for Life': A Community-Based Men's Health Initiative for Men's Sheds in Ireland.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Unhealthy Behaviors Among Canadian Men Are Predictors of Comorbidities: Implications for Clinical Practice.American journal of men's health · 2018Article
- The economic benefits of fruit and vegetable consumption in Canada.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2017Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Few studies have assessed differences in the prevalence of and economic burden attributable to tobacco smoking, excess weight, physical inactivity, and alcohol use by gender. This article examines these gender differences in Canadians between the ages of 30 and 64 years. It also estimates the potential cost avoidance if the prevalence of the four risk factors (RFs) were reduced modestly in males. Data on the prevalence of the RFs and the relative risk of disease associated with each of the RFs were combined to calculate population-attributable fractions. A prevalence-based cost-of-illness approach was used to estimate the economic burden associated with the four RFs. Middle-aged Canadian males are more likely to smoke tobacco (26.4% vs. 20.2%), consume hazardous or harmful levels of alcohol (14.6% vs. 8.2%), and have excess weight (65.6% vs. 47.1%) than middle-aged Canadian females, resulting in an annual economic burden that is 27% higher in males than females. No significant differences were observed in the proportion of males who are physically inactive (48.4% vs. 49.4%). Modelling only a 1% annual relative reduction each year through to 2036 would result in a cumulative cost avoidance between 2013 and 2036 of $50.7 billion. The differences in RF prevalence between middle-aged males and females have an important effect on the population's economic burden. A modest annual reduction in the four RFs in males can significantly affect population health and the economy over time.
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.