Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32639520›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of epidemiology2021

Invited Commentary: Rethinking Cervical Cancer Elimination in Terms of Lifetime Risk Rather Than Arbitrarily Defined Age-Standardized Incidence Rates.

Talía Malagón, Eduardo L Franco

Abstract readComment
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of epidemiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 40% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Talía Malagón
Eduardo L Franco

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In their accompanying article, Vänskä et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2021;190(4):506-514) provide us with cohort lifetime risks of cervical cancer attributable to different types of human papillomavirus in Sweden. We argue that a standardized lifetime risk such as those calculated by Vänskä et al. might be a more appropriate public health target for cervical cancer elimination than age-standardized incidence rates. Age standardization to an arbitrary standard age distribution implies an implicit value choice regarding the weight of different age groups for which we find little moral justification. Conversely, a standardized lifetime risk uses standard life expectancy as a weight, corresponding to the likelihood that cervical cancer would impact a woman and prevent her from pursuing opportunities within a standard life span. Based on the data from Vänskä et al., a standardized lifetime risk of 129-250 cervical cancers per 100,000 women born could be an aspirational alternative public health target for cervical cancer elimination as a public health problem, complementary to the World Health Organization's arbitrary draft target of 4 cervical cancers per 100,000 age-standardized woman-years.

Indexed as

AlphapapillomavirusPapillomavirus InfectionsUterine Cervical NeoplasmsAge FactorsFemaleHumansIncidencePapillomaviridaeSwedenage distributionage of onsetdisease eradicationmass screeningpapillomavirus infectionspublic healthuterine cervical neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID32639520
OpenAlexW3041469374

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.