ArticleCancer medicine2025
Exploring the Influence of Sex and Gender on Cancer: A Comprehensive Analysis.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Checking assumptions: advancing the analysis of sex and gender in health sciences.Biology of sex differences · 2026Review
- Exploring the Influence of Sex and Gender on Cancer: A Comprehensive Analysis.Cancer medicine · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeOur aim was to untangle the effect of biological sex and psychosocial gender on rates of self-reported cancer.
methodsFor this study, the Austrian Health Information Survey 2019 was used. Individuals with cancer (n = 415) were selected and divided by sex (female 53.3%). Descriptive results were reported as mean/standard deviation or frequency/percentage. Next, the cancer versus non-cancer and female versus male cancer cohorts were compared by using a chi-square test or an unpaired t-test. By logistic regression models adjusted by age, the association of cancer, biological sex, and gender-related variables (including employment status, educational level, marital status, household income and size) was investigated in the total cohort, as well as stratified by sex.
resultsSelf-reported cancer was positively related with being unemployed/retired versus employed (OR 2.06, p < 0.001), being married versus single (OR 1.90, p = 0.005), household size over 1 compared to 1 (OR 1.42, p = 0.025), self-reported depression (OR 2.13, p < 0.001), and former smoking (OR 1.84, p < 0.001). A negative relation between having cancer and being a daily smoker was seen (OR 0.22, p = 0.006). No association between cancer and biological sex was found. Similar correlations of gender-related variables on cancer rates were found in the sex-disaggregated analyses; however, marital status as well as daily smoking were not associated with cancer diagnosis in males. In contrast to males, in females former smoking and alcohol consumption showed no association with cancer rates.
conclusionOur findings suggest that gender-related variables, rather than biological sex, are associated with sel-reported cancer.
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.