ArticleBMC public health2019
Age-standardized expected years of life lost: quantification of cancer severity.
Article in BMC public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review and comparative evaluation to develop and validate a comprehensive framework for cancer surveillance systems.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025Pooled it
- Mortality and disease burden of oral cancer in China: a time-trend analysis on the China Death Surveillance Database from 2006 to 2021.BMC oral health · 2024Article
- Analysis of the disease burden trend of malignant tumors of the female reproductive system in China from 2006 to 2020.BMC women's health · 2022Article
- Heterogeneous trends of premature mortalities in Japan: joinpoint regression analysis of years of life lost from 2011 to 2019.Dialogues in health · 2022Article
- Postoperative and long-term survival in relation to life-expectancy after pancreatic surgery in elderly patients (cohort study).Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe critical implications of the expected years of life lost (EYLL) index of cancer for health policy assessments have been largely overlooked. We advocate to standardize life lost indices.
methodsUsing the Taiwan Cancer Registry database as an example, we calculated the EYLL and the age-standardized EYLL to facilitate comparisons among cancer types (a total of 903,935 patients from the database). The International Cancer Survival Standard was used for calculating age-standardized EYLL.
resultsPancreatic cancer is the most severe cancer in Taiwan, with the greatest age-standardized EYLL for the men (15.6 years) and women (18.0 years) as well as for the men and women combined (16.6 years). Negative correlations were observed between unstandardized EYLL of cancer and mean age at diagnosis.
conclusionsThe unstandardized EYLL represents an overall assessment of disease burden, whereas the age-standardized EYLL is a suitable measure of disease severity. We suggest that both measures be incorporated into routine annual reports of cancer statistics alongside the usual incidence and mortality rates and their age-standardized counterparts.
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.