ArticleBMJ open2021
Exposure to persistent organic pollutants and thyroid cancer risk: a study protocol of systematic review and meta-analysis.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe thyroid cancer incidence has been increasing all over the world. However, the aetiology of thyroid cancer remains unclear. A growing body of evidence suggested exposure to persistent organic pollutants (POPs) may play a role in the initiation of thyroid cancer, but the results are generally inconsistent across studies. This review aims to synthesise the evidence for the health effects of POPs on the risk of thyroid cancer. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol was reported in accordance to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA) statements. A comprehensive search, including electronic database search (eg, PubMed, Embase, ProQuest and CNKI), website search and manual search, will be performed to identify all eligible studies. The Population, Exposure, Comparator and Outcome framework was used to clarify the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale will be used to assess the quality of included studies. Maximally adjusted effect estimates from individual studies will be summarised with random-effect models in a conservative manner. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required in this systematic review of published literatures. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42020181343.
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.