ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Effects of non-initial radiation exposure on solid cancer mortality risk among Hiroshima A-bomb survivors.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Methodological considerations on the estimation of non-initial radiation effects among Hiroshima atomic bomb survivors: a commentary on Ohtaki et al. (2025).Journal of radiation research · 2026Article
- A national analysis of the impact of proximity to nuclear power plants on lung, breast and colon cancer mortalities in the U.S., 2000-2020.Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology · 2026Article
- Ionizing radiation and Alzheimer's disease: epidemiology, mechanisms, and eCIRP-mediated tau pathology.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Exposure of atomic bomb (A-bomb) survivors to non-initial (residual) radiation and consequent health effects has not yet been reliably estimated. This study aimed to quantify the contribution of non-initial radiation to the increase in solid cancer mortality risk among A-bomb survivors in Hiroshima through a comparative analysis considering geographical factors. Data: We analyzed the data of 43,056 (17,603 men and 25,453 women) A-bomb survivors registered in the A-bomb Survivor Cohort Database (ABS) at Hiroshima University. These subjects were aged <50 years old at the time of the bombing and lived in Hiroshima Prefecture as of 1 January 1970, after being exposed within 5.0 km of the hypocenter. Methods: The radiation doses and excess deaths from all solid cancers of the A-bomb survivors were estimated for districts geographically divided by distance and direction from the hypocenter. The dose was defined as the sum of the initial and non-initial radiation doses, and district-averaged non-initial doses were calculated. The excess relative risks (ERRs) of all solid cancer deaths were estimated using multivariate survival analysis with an additive parametric hazard model under the linear no-threshold (LNT) hypothesis. The γ-ray equivalent doses (Sv) from non-initial radiation were estimated based on the estimated ERRs. Results: Estimated ERRs were notably higher west of the hypocenter than in the other directions. This trend increased with increasing distance from the hypocenter, and the ERRs in men were higher than those in women. Significantly higher ERR values of 52% ( Conclusion: The findings of this study highlight the considerable contribution of non-initial radiation to the health consequences of the A-bomb survivors. These effects are attributable to the radionuclides generated by the A-bomb detonation, which were assumed to be carried by the wind to the west and deposited with rain in the western region from the hypocenter.
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.