ArticlePloS one2025
Spatial insights into colorectal cancer risk factors and priority areas for screening in the United Kingdom based on data from the UK Biobank.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Geography and geospatial data science hold the potential to make unique contributions to the reduction of the burden of cancer on society. Here we use colorectal cancer (CRC) as an example to show how spatial insights into CRC risk factors and priority areas for screening may be obtained to achieve geographically targeted screening. We obtained data from the UK Biobank and divided the participants into the older (50<=age < 70) and young (age < 50) adult groups. The data consists of 2,080 CRC cases and 8,062 controls. We used a case-control study and geographically weighted logistic regression (GWLR) to explore spatial variations in risk levels of significant factors at a fine geographic resolution. Analysis results reveal that, among all significant risk factors, polygenic risk score (PRS) is the most important risk factor for both age groups. Findings suggest that the top priority screening areas for older adults, using PRS as the sole risk factor, are between Sheffield, Birmingham, Cardiff, Bristol, and west of Greater London. For young adults, the top priority areas are between the south of Glasgow and Edinburgh and northwest of Greater London. Furthermore, the approach used in this study holds promise for developing more effective targeted cancer screening.
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.