ArticleScientific reports2023
Exclusive waterpipe smoking and the risk of nasopharynx cancer in Vietnamese men, a prospective cohort study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Global Prevalence of Combustible Cigarettes and Noncombustible Nicotine or Tobacco Products Use Among Adolescents, 2014-2021.Journal of Korean medical science · 2025Pooled it
- The waterpipe smoking and human health: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 191 observational studies.Systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- A closed-loop comprehensive analysis of global burden data, future projections, risk factors, and molecular mechanisms on nasopharyngeal carcinoma.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2026Article
- Article
- Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma in Southeast Asia: Current Landscape and Future Priorities.British journal of biomedical science · 2025Review
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tobacco smoking is carcinogenic to humans. Besides cigarettes, the most common form of tobacco smoking, there was sparse evidence of waterpipe's carcinogenicity-induced nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC). This study investigated the association between waterpipe smoking and NPC mortality. Our study followed up with 20,144 eligible man participants from nine northern Vietnam communes between 2007 and 2019. Face-to-face interviews were conducted to gather data on exclusive waterpipe and cigarette smoking and dietary intake using structured semi-quantitative food frequency and lifestyle questionnaires. Nasopharyngeal cancer was determined by accessing the medical records at the state health facilities. We estimated the Cox proportional hazard ratio and 95% confidence intervals, HR (95% CI). The proportion of never smokers, exclusive waterpipe, exclusive cigarette, and dual waterpipe and cigarette smokers was 55.8%, 14.5%, 16.6%, and 13.1%, respectively. Exclusively waterpipe smokers increased the risk of NPC death compared to exclusively cigarette smokers, HR (95% CI): 4.51 (1.25, 16.31), p = 0.022. A dose-dependent positive relationship between NPC and exclusive waterpipe smoking was significantly seen for higher intensity HR (95% CI): 1.35 (1.07, 1.71), earlier age of smoking initiation HR (95% CI): 1.26 (1.06, 1.50), longer duration HR (95% CI): 1.31 (1.04, 1.66), and the cumulative number of a smoke lifetime HR (95% CI): 1.37 (1.08, 1.74). We observed a significant positive association between exclusive waterpipe smoking and NPC in men. The findings suggested that waterpipe smoking is likely more harmful than cigarettes in developing this cancer. A firm tobacco control against waterpipe smoking is highly recommended.
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.