Association of Tea Consumption and Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Laboratory and epidemiologic studies suggest a protective effect of tea consumption on risk of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). We designed a case-control study to examine the association between putative protective exposures, including tea consumption, and SCC risk using a large health maintenance organization population. Cases (n=415) were defined as Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC) members with a pathology-verified SCC in 2004 and controls (n=415) were age-, gender-, and race-matched members with no previous history of skin cancer. Tea consumption and SCC risk factors were ascertained by questionnaire. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using conditional logistic regression to estimate the association of SCC with regular use, as well as dose and duration of tea consumption. Risk factor adjusted models included education, smoking, hair and eye color, skin type, family history of skin cancer, and history of freckling, sunburns, sun exposure, and tanning bed use. Adjusted analyses showed no reduction in SCC risk with regular consumption of tea (OR=1.11, 95% CI: 0.81-1.54). Examining duration, dose, and combined duration and dose exposure variables did not alter findings. We found no evidence that tea consumption was associated with cutaneous SCC risk.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".