MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cigarette smoking and risk of death from colorectal cancer in women

2000· article· en· W2104427170 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rohan Rohan, Jain, Rehm, Ashley, Susan J. Bondy, Ferrence, Cohen

Bibliographic record

VenueColorectal Disease · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicColorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
Canadian institutionsToronto Public HealthOntario Tobacco Research UnitUniversity of TorontoInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersMedical Research CouncilU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsMedicineColorectal cancerCancerProportional hazards modelInternal medicineCohortCohort studyEpidemiologyHazard ratioBreast cancerConfidence intervalRelative riskOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Much of the epidemiological evidence concerning the relationship between cigarette smoking and colorectal cancer has come from studies in men, and less is known about the role of smoking in the aetiology and pathogenesis of colorectal cancer in women. Therefore, the purpose of the present study was to investigate the association between cigarette smoking and risk of death from colorectal cancer in a large cohort of women. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: The study was conducted within the cohort of 56 837 women who were enrolled in the Canadian National Breast Screening Study (NBSS) and who completed self-administered dietary questionnaires. (The NBSS is a randomized controlled trial of screening for breast cancer in women aged 40-59.) During follow up to December 31, 1993, 90 women died from colorectal cancer (79 from colon cancer, 11 from rectal cancer). Deaths were ascertained by means of record linkage to the Canadian Mortality Database. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazards ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between cigarette smoking and risk of death from colorectal cancer, after adjustment for age alone, or age, energy intake, alcohol consumption, and other potentially relevant confounders. RESULTS: Cigarette smoking was not associated with altered risk of death from colorectal cancer. The multivariate HR (95% CI) for the risk in ever smokers compared with that in never smokers was 1.37 (0.86-2.18). There was no evidence for trends in risk with cigarette-years of consumption, and by amount and duration of consumption. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that cigarette smoking is not associated with altered risk of death from colorectal cancer in women. However, given the possibility that the association between cigarette smoking and colorectal cancer might not become evident until at least 30-40 years after the commencement of smoking, it might still be too early to detect an association, since uptake of smoking by women occurred later than uptake by men.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.242 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueColorectal DiseaseSame topicColorectal Cancer Screening and DetectionFrench-language works237,207