ArticleScientific reports2025
Regional differences in the disease burden and attributable risk factors of female cancers.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Estimates of the global burden of HIV-attributable and all-cause AIDS-defining cancers: a population-based modeling study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- Global burden of breast cancer and its association with red meat consumption: spatiotemporal trends, projections, and triangulation of evidence.World journal of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Global, regional, and national burden of ovarian cancer and uterine cancer attributable to high BMI, 1990-2021: analysis of data from the global burden of disease study 2021.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Serum USP1 and PD-L1 levels independently predict treatment response and prognosis in cervical cancer: a retrospective cohort study.American journal of cancer research · 2026Article
- Two Decades of Female Breast Cancer Mortality in Hungary: Epidemiological Trends Since EU Accession.Cancers · 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The aim was to assess the differences in the burden and risk factors of female cancers among women aged 20-94 years across regions and countries, in order to provide a reference for formulating tailored interventions. The study analyzed the incidence, deaths, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) using data from the Global Burden of Disease 2021 study. Age-period-cohort model evaluated the effects of the age, period, and cohort on the burden, and negative binomial regression explored the association of the socio-demographic index (SDI) with the burden. From 1990 to 2021, regional and national incidence, deaths, and DALYs of female cancers varied markedly. Overall, SDI was significantly positively associated with the incidence of female cancers, except for cervical cancer (with a negative relationship). High body-mass index as the leading risk factor of uterine cancer contributed to the higher burden, such as in the USA and higher SDI regions. Diet high in red meat, unsafe sex, and high body-mass index were the leading risk factors for breast cancer, cervical cancer, and uterine cancer, respectively; however, other socioeconomic and cultural factors should be considered, such as in the rural areas of China and lower SDI regions. A slightly increasing trend in the burden of breast cancer in the recent birth cohorts indicated the effect of generational experiences. The disease burden of female cancers has increased and varies with SDI levels and regions. The findings provide new insights into the development of targeted preventive measures for the specific region from the perspective of social and cultural context.
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.