ArticleEuropean journal of epidemiology2017
Measuring childhood cancer late effects: evidence of a healthy survivor effect.
Article in European journal of epidemiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Whole-Blood Fatty Acid Phenotypes and Subsequent Quality-of-Life Changes Among Cancer Survivors.Nutrients · 2026Article
- Supervised Exercise Interventions in Childhood Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionGiven considerable focus on health outcomes among childhood cancer survivors, we aimed to explore whether survivor bias is apparent during long-term follow-up of childhood cancer survivors.
methodsWe identified all 1-year survivors of cancer diagnosed before 20 years of age in Denmark, Finland, Iceland, and Sweden. From the general population, we randomly sampled a comparison cohort. Study individuals were followed for hospitalizations for diseases of the gastroenterological tract, endocrine system, cardiovascular system, or urinary tract from the start of the cancer registries to 2010. We estimated cumulative incidence with death as competing risk and used threshold regression to compare the hazards of the diseases of interest at ages 20, 40, 60, and 75 years.
resultsOur study included 27,007 one-year survivors of childhood cancer and 165,620 individuals from the general population. The cumulative incidence of all four outcomes was higher for childhood cancer survivors during early adulthood, but for three outcomes, the cumulative incidence was higher for the general population after age 55 years. The hazard ratios (HRs) decreased for all outcomes with increasing age, and for two of the outcomes, the hazards were higher for the general population at older ages (endocrine diseases: age-specific HRs = 3.0, 1.4, 1.0, 0.87; Cardiovascular diseases: age-specific HRs = 4.1, 1.4, 0.97, 0.84).
conclusionsOur findings provide empirical evidence that survivor bias attenuates measures of association when comparing survivors with the general population. The design and analysis of studies among childhood cancer survivors, particularly as this population attains older ages, should account for survivor bias to avoid misinterpreting estimates of disease burden.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29185125What 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.