Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33931407›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2021

Urban-rural disparity in cancer incidence in China, 2008-2012: a cross-sectional analysis of data from 36 cancer registers.

Shuai Yuan, Shao-Hua Xie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
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

2 authors.

Shuai YuanInstitute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-5055-5627
Shao-Hua XieUpper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden shaohua.xie@ki.se.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe substantial differences in socioeconomic and lifestyle exposures between urban and rural areas in China may lead to urban-rural disparity in cancer risk. This study aimed to assess the urban-rural disparity in cancer incidence in China.

methodsUsing data from 36 regional cancer registries in China in 2008-2012, we compared the age-standardised incidence rates of cancer by sex and anatomic site between rural and urban areas. We calculated the rate difference and rate ratio comparing rates in rural versus urban areas by sex and cancer type.

resultsThe incidence rate of all cancers in women was slightly lower in rural areas than in urban areas, but the total cancer rate in men was higher in rural areas than in urban areas. The incidence rates in women were higher in rural areas than in urban areas for cancers of the oesophagus, stomach, and liver and biliary passages, but lower for cancers of thyroid and breast. Men residing in rural areas had higher incidence rates for cancers of the oesophagus, stomach, and liver and biliary passages, but lower rates for prostate cancer, lip, oral cavity and pharynx cancer, and colorectal cancer.

conclusionsOur findings suggest substantial urban-rural disparity in cancer incidence in China, which varies across cancer types and the sexes. Cancer prevention strategies should be tailored for common cancers in rural and urban areas.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsRural PopulationChinaCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansIncidenceMaleRegistriesUrban Populationepidemiologyoncologypublic health

Identifiers

PMID33931407
PMCPMC8098914

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.