Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32899527›Full record

ReviewMetabolites2020

Association between Metabolites and the Risk of Lung Cancer: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies.

Kian Boon Lee, Lina Ang, Wai-Ping Yau, Wei Jie Seow

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Metabolites, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Associations between Metabolomic Signatures of Persistent Smoking Effects and Lung Cancer Risk among Former Smokers.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kian Boon LeeDepartment of Pharmacy, Faculty of Science, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117543, Singapore.
Lina AngSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore 117549, Singapore.
Wai-Ping YauDepartment of Pharmacy, Faculty of Science, National University of Singapore, Singapore 117543, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-7852-9698
Wei Jie SeowSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore and National University Health System, Singapore 117549, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-9114-854X
National University of Singapore · SG

Funding

NUS Startup Grant 2017
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Globally, lung cancer is the most prevalent cancer type. However, screening and early detection is challenging. Previous studies have identified metabolites as promising lung cancer biomarkers. This systematic literature review and meta-analysis aimed to identify metabolites associated with lung cancer risk in observational studies. The literature search was performed in PubMed and EMBASE databases, up to 31 December 2019, for observational studies on the association between metabolites and lung cancer risk. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I

Indexed as

biomarkerslung cancermeta-analysismetabolomicssystematic literature review

Identifiers

PMID32899527
PMCPMC7570231
OpenAlexW3083711323

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.