SynthesisBMC cancer2024
Estimating smoking-attributable lung cancer mortality in Chinese adults from 2000 to 2020: a comparison of three methods.
Synthesis in BMC cancer, 2024. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trends and projections of smoking-attributable lung cancer burden among the elderly in China, 1990-2021.American journal of cancer research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSmoking is a significant public health concern in China and a leading cause of lung cancer deaths among adults. This study aims to employ three methods to estimate smoking-attributable lung cancer mortality among Chinese adults from 2000 to 2020.
methodsPopulation attributable fractions (PAFs) of lung cancer deaths caused by smoking were estimated using lagged smoking prevalence, Peto-Lopez, and dose-response relationship methods, separately. Smoking exposure was obtained from national tobacco surveys in China, and relative risks (RR) were derived from a meta-analysis of state-of-the-art studies among the Chinese population. Finally, we estimated the sex- and age-stratified smoking-attributable lung cancer deaths in Chinese population in 2000, 2005, 2010, 2015, and 2020.
resultsThe PAFs estimated using 5- and 10-year lagged smoking prevalence method (45-47%) and Peto-Lopez method (46-47%) were similar, while PAFs calculated using the dose-response method were highest (47-58%). The PAFs were consistently higher in males than in females. Age-specific PAFs estimated by lagged smoking prevalence method (54-60%) and the Peto-Lopez method (57-61%) in males were similar and relatively stable, with slight decreases in older populations, while the dose-response relationship-based PAFs increased with age and fluctuated by year. By using the above methods, smoking-attributable lung cancer deaths were estimated to be 134,100, 134,600, 136,600, and 155,300 in 2000 increasing to 310,300, 301,100, 306,000, and 314,700 in 2020, respectively.
conclusionThe estimation from dose-response methods could better reflect the smoking effect, however, high-quality data and accurate estimation of parameters are necessary.
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.