↓ Skip to main content

Consumption of meat and fish and risk of lung cancer: results from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition

Overview of attention for article published in Cancer Causes and Control, April 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
38 Mendeley
Title
Consumption of meat and fish and risk of lung cancer: results from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition
Published in
Cancer Causes and Control, April 2011
DOI 10.1007/s10552-011-9764-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jakob Linseisen, Sabine Rohrmann, Bas Bueno-de-Mesquita, Frederike L. Büchner, Hendriek C. Boshuizen, Antonio Agudo, Inger Torhild Gram, Christina C. Dahm, Kim Overvad, Rikke Egeberg, Anne Tjønneland, Heiner Boeing, Annika Steffen, Rudolf Kaaks, Annekatrin Lukanova, Franco Berrino, Domenico Palli, Salvatore Panico, Rosario Tumino, Eva Ardanaz, Miren Dorronsoro, José-Maria Huerta, Laudina Rodríguez, María-José Sánchez, Torgny Rasmuson, Göran Hallmans, Jonas Manjer, Elisabet Wirfält, Dagrun Engeset, Guri Skeie, Michael Katsoulis, Eleni Oikonomou, Antonia Trichopoulou, Petra H. M. Peeters, Kay-Tee Khaw, Nicholas Wareham, Naomi Allen, Tim Key, Paul Brennan, Isabelle Romieu, Nadia Slimani, Anne-Claire Vergnaud, Wei W. Xun, Paolo Vineis, Elio Riboli

Abstract

Evidence from case-control studies, but less so from cohort studies, suggests a positive association between meat intake and risk of lung cancer. Therefore, this association was evaluated in the frame of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition, EPIC. Data from 478,021 participants, recruited from 10 European countries, who completed a dietary questionnaire in 1992-2000 were evaluated; 1,822 incident primary lung cancer cases were included in the present evaluation. Relative risk estimates were calculated for categories of meat intake using multi-variably adjusted Cox proportional hazard models. In addition, the continuous intake variables were calibrated by means of 24-h diet recall data to account for part of the measurement error. There were no consistent associations between meat consumption and the risk of lung cancer. Neither red meat (RR = 1.06, 95% CI 0.89-1.27 per 50 g intake/day; calibrated model) nor processed meat (RR = 1.13, 95% CI 0.95-1.34 per 50 g/day; calibrated model) was significantly related to an increased risk of lung cancer. Also, consumption of white meat and fish was not associated with the risk of lung cancer. These findings do not support the hypothesis that a high intake of red and processed meat is a risk factor for lung cancer.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 5%
Unknown 36 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 18%
Student > Bachelor 7 18%
Unspecified 5 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Student > Master 3 8%
Other 12 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 42%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 16%
Unspecified 6 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Environmental Science 2 5%
Other 6 16%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 July 2013.
All research outputs
#9,838,541
of 12,319,220 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Causes and Control
#1,269
of 1,515 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,298
of 101,326 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Causes and Control
#18
of 22 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,319,220 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,515 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 101,326 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 22 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.