ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023
Evaluation of a Novel Ambient Light Survey Question in the Cancer Prevention Study-3.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Nighttime light exposure may increase cancer risk by disrupting the circadian system. However, there is no well-established survey method for measuring ambient light. In the Cancer Prevention Study-3, 732 men and women answered a light survey based on seven environments. The light environment in the past year was assessed twice, one year apart, and four one-week diaries were collected between the annual surveys. A total of 170 participants wore a meter to measure photopic illuminance and circadian stimulus (CS). Illuminance and CS values were estimated for lighting environments from measured values and evaluated with a cross validation approach. The kappas for self-reported light environment comparing the two annual surveys were 0.61 on workdays and 0.49 on non-workdays. Kappas comparing the annual survey to weekly diaries were 0.71 and 0.57 for work and non-workdays, respectively. Agreement was highest for reporting of darkness (95.3%), non-residential light (86.5%), and household light (75.6%) on workdays. Measured illuminance and CS identified three peaks of light (darkness, indoor lighting, and outdoor daytime light). Estimated illuminance and CS were correlated with the measured values overall (r = 0.77 and r = 0.67, respectively) but were less correlated within each light environment (r = 0.23-0.43). The survey has good validity to assess ambient light for studies of human health.
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.