Alcohol consumption and the risk of renal cancers in the <scp>E</scp>uropean prospective investigation into cancer and nutrition (EPIC)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Epidemiologic studies have reported that moderate alcohol consumption is inversely associated with the risk of renal cancer. However, there is no information available on the associations in renal cancer subsites. From 1992 through to 2010, 477,325 men and women in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition cohort were followed for incident renal cancers (n = 931). Baseline and lifetime alcohol consumption was assessed by country-specific, validated dietary questionnaires. Information on past alcohol consumption was collected by lifestyle questionnaires. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated from Cox proportional hazard models. In multivariate analysis, total alcohol consumption at baseline was inversely associated with renal cancer; the HR and 95% CI for the increasing categories of total alcohol consumption at recruitment versus the light drinkers category were 0.78 (0.62-0.99), 0.82 (0.64-1.04), 0.70 (0.55-0.90), 0.91 (0.63-1.30), respectively, (ptrend = 0.001). A similar relationship was observed for average lifetime alcohol consumption and for all renal cancer subsites combined or for renal parenchyma subsite. The trend was not observed in hypertensive individuals and not significant in smokers. In conclusion, moderate alcohol consumption was associated with a decreased risk of renal cancer.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it