ArticleBritish journal of cancer2023
Different operationalizations of the 2018 WCRF/AICR cancer prevention recommendations and risk of cancer.
Article in British journal of cancer, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Combined healthy lifestyle factors and psychosocial outcomes among cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2026Pooled it
- The 2018 World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research Score and Cancer Risk: results from the diabetes prevention program outcomes study.The American journal of clinical nutrition · 2025Trial
- WCRF/AICR dietary adherence-associated metabolic bridge phenotypes and incident lung cancer risk: a prospective cohort study of the UK Biobank.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Article
- Association between adherence to cancer prevention guidelines and cancer risk: a comprehensive systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of cohort studies.EClinicalMedicine · 2025Article
- Adherence to World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research Guidelines and Mortality among Participants with Colorectal Cancer in the MEC.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2025Article
- Evaluating recommendation-based dietary and physical activity strategies for prostate cancer prevention: a target trial emulation in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study.American journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
- The epidemiology, etiology, and future prophylactic options for cancers in Mainland China.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
- Recommendations for Healthy Lifestyle for Cancer Prevention and Healthy Aging.Journal of cancer prevention · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe standardized scoring system assessing adherence to the 2018 World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF)/American Institute for Cancer Research (AICR) cancer prevention recommendations assigns equal weight for each recommendation, thereby giving higher weight to dietary factors collectively (5 points) than adiposity (1 point) and physical activity (1 point). An alternative score assigning equal weights to the adiposity, physical activity, alcohol, and other dietary (composite) recommendations may better predict cancer associations.
methodsWe examined associations between standardized and alternative scores with cancer risk in two US prospective cohorts. Multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using Cox regression.
resultsDuring 28 years of follow-up, 16,342 incident cancer cases in women and 8729 cases in men occurred. Individuals in the highest versus lowest quintile of the standardized score had a reduced overall cancer risk (women: HR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.85, 0.94; men: HR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.81, 0.94). Results were slightly stronger for the alternative score (women: HR = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.79, 0.87; men: HR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.75, 0.86). Similar patterns were observed for obesity-related, alcohol-related, smoking-related, and digestive system cancers.
conclusionsGreater adherence to the WCRF/AICR cancer prevention recommendations was associated with lower cancer risk. A score assigning equal weights to the adiposity, physical activity, alcohol, and all remaining diet components yielded stronger associations than the standardized score.
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.