ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2021
All-Cause Mortality Risk in National Prostate Cancer Cohort: An Impact of Population-Based Prostate Cancer Screening.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prostate cancer screening with MRI: insights from the ESUR Prostate MRI Working Group.European radiology · 2026Review
- Digital twin technologies in prostate cancer as a frontier for precision medicine.European radiology experimental · 2026Review
- Recent Patterns and Trends in Global Prostate Cancer Incidence and Mortality: An Update.European urology · 2025Article
- Meeting Highlights The 4th Marie Skłodowska-Curie Symposium on cancer research and care: Mechanisms of support for regional & international collaborations.Wiadomosci lekarskie (Warsaw, Poland : 1960) · 2025Article
- Prostate-Specific Antigen and Testosterone Levels as Biochemical Indicators of Cognitive Function in Prostate Cancer Survivors and the Role of Diabetes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Are health awareness months dedicated to urological and men's health diseases effective at increasing public interest? A Google Trends study.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of IndiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study is to evaluate all-cause mortality risk differences before and during prostate cancer screening, with a profound focus on the differences between screened and not-screened patient groups. Prostate cancer cases diagnosed between 1998 and 2016 were identified from the population-based Lithuanian Cancer Registry and linked with screening status in the National Health Insurance Fund database. The analysis was stratified by a period of diagnosis and screening status. Standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) were used to assess all-cause and cause-specific mortality risk. The SMRs were calculated by dividing the observed number of deaths among prostate cancer patients by the expected number of deaths from the general population. All-cause SMR (1.45 (95% CI 1.42-1.48)) in the pre-screening period was higher compared to the screening period (SMR = 1.17 (95% CI 1.15-1.19)). An increased all-cause mortality risk among prostate cancer patients was observed in the not-screened patient population (SMR = 1.76 (95% CI 1.71-1.82)), while all-cause mortality risk in the screened patient population was similar to the general population (SMR = 1.00 (95% CI 0.97-1.02)). Screened patients with localized stage of disease had lower all-cause mortality risk than the general population (SMR = 0.72 (95% CI 0.70-0.75)). In conclusion, men with prostate cancer in Lithuania had excess all-cause mortality risk compared to the general population. The all-cause mortality risk among screened patients was not higher than expected.
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.