| 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 & 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 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 54 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 11 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 11% |
| Professor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 21% |
| Unknown | 13 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 36% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 9% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 5% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 4% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 8 | 14% |
| Unknown | 16 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 18 June 2019.
All research outputs
#7,381,450
of 23,854,458 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Causes & Control
#859
of 2,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#38,640
of 111,480 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Causes & Control
#8
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,854,458 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,187 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
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 111,480 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.