ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2024
Uterine Fibroid Prevalence in a Predominantly Black, Chicago-Based Cohort.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
(1) Objectives: To investigate the effect of individual-level, neighborhood, and environmental variables on uterine fibroid (UF) prevalence in a Chicago-based cohort. (2) Methods: Data from the Chicago Multiethnic Prevention and Surveillance Study (COMPASS) were analyzed. Individual-level variables were obtained from questionnaires, neighborhood variables from the Chicago Health Atlas, and environmental variables from NASA satellite ambient air exposure levels. The Shapiro-Wilk test, logistic regression models, and Spearman's correlations were used to evaluate the association of variables to UF diagnosis. (3) Results: We analyzed 602 participants (mean age: 50.3 ± 12.3) who responded to a question about UF diagnosis. More Black than White participants had a UF diagnosis (OR, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.62-2.79). We observed non-significant trends between individual-level and neighborhood variables and UF diagnosis. Ambient air pollutants, PM2.5, and DSLPM were protective against UF diagnosis (OR 0.20, CI: 0.04-0.97: OR 0.33, CI: 0.13-0.87). (4) Conclusions: Associations observed within a sample in a specific geographic area may not be generalizable and must be interpreted cautiously.
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.