ReviewJournal of racial and ethnic health disparities2026
Racial Disparities in Tobacco Smoking-Related Risks for Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review & Meta-analysis.
Review in Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveDespite the higher lung cancer incidence among Black individuals, existing evidence on racial disparities in smoking-related lung cancer risk remains limited. This review aims to examine differences in smoking-related lung cancer risk between Black and White individuals.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of U.S.-based observational studies from 1964 to June 2024. Eligible studies examined lung cancer incidence as the primary outcome and reported race-specific estimates for smoking-related risk. Meta-analysis was used to compare lung cancer risk across racial groups by smoking status (current/former/ever vs. never).
resultsOf 460 abstracts screened, 36 met inclusion criteria, and 11 articles were included in the meta-analysis. Individuals who currently smoke had greater odds of developing lung cancer compared to those who never smoked (OR = 15.52 (95% CI 13.98-17.23)). Similarly, individuals who formerly smoked had greater odds of developing lung cancer compared to those who never smoked (OR = 6.36 (95% CI 5.73-7.07)). In the weighted meta-analysis model, we did not demonstrate significant odds of incident lung cancer cases by race, irrespective of smoking status.
conclusionsOur findings did not provide statistical evidence of a difference in smoking-related lung cancer risk by race, though precision was limited, particularly for Black participants. Future research should evaluate pack-years and other risk factors to elucidate differences in smoking behaviors among high-risk populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42251222What 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.