ArticlePloS one2024
Interaction of sedentary behaviour and educational level in breast cancer risk.
Article in PloS one, 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.
- Association between daily sitting time and breast cancer among obese women: a nationwide population-based study.BMC women's health · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis cross-sectional study aims to analyse the relationship between sedentary behaviour and breast cancer (BC) risk from a social perspective.
methodsWomen aged 45-70 who participated in the Valencia Region Breast Cancer Screening Programme (2018-2019) were included, with a total of 121,359 women analysed, including 506 with cancer and 120,853 without cancer. The response variable was BC (screen-detected) and the main explanatory variable was sedentary behaviour (≤2 / >2-≤3 / >3-≤5 / >5 hours/day, h/d). Nested logistic regression models (M) were estimated: M1: sedentary behaviour adjusted for age and family history of BC; M2: M1 + hormonal/reproductive variables (menopausal status, number of pregnancies, hormone replacement therapy; in addition, months of breastfeeding was added for a subsample of women with one or more live births); M3: M2 + lifestyle variables (body mass index, smoking habits); M4: M3 + socioeconomic variables (educational level, occupation); Final model: M4 + gender variables (childcare responsibilities, family size). Interaction between sedentary behaviour and educational level was analysed in the Final model. Moreover, for the whole sample, postmenopausal women and HR+ BC, the Final model was stratified by educational level.
resultsSedentary behaviour was associated with an increased risk of BC with a nearly statistically significant effect in the Final model (>2-≤3 h/d: OR = 1.22 (0.93-1.61); >3-≤5 h/d: OR = 1.14 (0.86-1.52); >5: OR = 1.19 (0.89-1.60)). For women with a low educational level, sitting more than 2 h/d was associated with an increased risk of BC in the whole sample (>2-≤3 h/d OR = 1.93 (1.19-3.21); in postmenopausal women (>2-≤3 h/d, OR = 2.12 (1.18-2.96), >5h/d OR = 1.75 (1.01-3.11)) and in HR+ BC (>2-≤3h/d, OR = 2.15 (1.22-3.99)). Similar results were observed for women with one or more live births. Conclusions Sitting >2 h/d is associated with BC risk in women with low educational level, especially in postmenopausal women and those with live births.
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.