ReviewBritish journal of cancer2017
Study designs may influence results: the problems with questionnaire-based case-control studies on the epidemiology of glioma.
Review in British journal of cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Partitioned glioma heritability shows subtype-specific enrichment in immune cells.Neuro-oncology · 2021Pooled it
- Testing for causality between systematically identified risk factors and glioma: a Mendelian randomization study.BMC cancer · 2020Pooled it
- Update on the effect of exogenous hormone use on glioma risk in women: a meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2018Pooled it
- The relationship between asthma and glioma: a case-control study in a universal access healthcare system.Journal of neuro-oncology · 2026Article
- Case Report: Glioblastoma in cohabiting partners: a molecularly characterized temporal cluster.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Searching for causal relationships of glioma: a phenome-wide Mendelian randomisation study.British journal of cancer · 2021Article
- Lack of association between modifiable exposures and glioma risk: a Mendelian randomization analysis.Neuro-oncology · 2020Article
- Risk factors for childhood and adult primary brain tumors.Neuro-oncology · 2019Review
- Impact of atopy on risk of glioma: a Mendelian randomisation study.BMC medicine · 2018Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Glioma is a rare brain tumour with a very poor prognosis and the search for modifiable factors is intense. We reviewed the literature concerning risk factors for glioma obtained in case-control designed epidemiological studies in order to discuss the influence of this methodology on the observed results. When reviewing the association between three exposures, medical radiation, exogenous hormone use and allergy, we critically appraised the evidence from both case-control and cohort studies. For medical radiation and hormone replacement therapy (HRT), questionnaire-based case-control studies appeared to show an inverse association, whereas nested case-control and cohort studies showed no association. For allergies, the inverse association was observed irrespective of study design. We recommend that the questionnaire-based case-control design be placed lower in the hierarchy of studies for establishing cause-and-effect for diseases such as glioma. We suggest that a state-of-the-art case-control study should, as a minimum, be accompanied by extensive validation of the exposure assessment methods and the representativeness of the study sample with regard to the exposures of interest. Otherwise, such studies cannot be regarded as 'hypothesis testing' but only 'hypothesis generating'. We consider that this holds true for all questionnaire-based case-control studies on cancer and other chronic diseases, although perhaps not to the same extent for each exposure-outcome combination.
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.