MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sun Avoidance and the Risk of Developing Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2018· review· en· W2911692366 on OpenAlexaffabout
Troy Hillier, Dylan E. O’Sullivan, Darren R. Brenner, Cheryl Peters, Will D. King

Bibliographic record

VenueISEE Conference Abstracts · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicNutrition, Genetics, and Disease
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryAlberta Health ServicesQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreast cancerMeta-analysisMedicineCancerRelative riskPhysiologyVitamin D and neurologySunlightDemographyOncologyEnvironmental healthInternal medicineConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: A relationship has been hypothesized between moderate solar ultraviolet radiation (UVR) exposure and breast cancer. This hypothesis centers on the anti-proliferative and apoptotic properties of vitamin D, as well as increases in nocturnal melatonin concentrations which have been shown to slow cellular proliferation. To date, the literature on the effects of exposure to UVR and breast cancer risk have not been systematically reviewed and synthesized. Furthermore, the effects of sun avoidance (low amounts of time spent in the sun) in different exposure windows (adolescence vs. a period relevant to diagnosis) have not been compared.Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the association between sun avoidance (defined as less than an hour of sun per day) and the risk of developing breast cancer. Associations were estimated using random effects models. Heterogeneity was investigated through subgroup analyses and I2 statistics.Results: Seven studies were included in this review with the majority (n=5) being conducted in Canada or the US. We observed an increased risk of breast cancer for individuals obtaining less than an hour of sun exposure per day during summer months compared to individuals that obtained greater than an hour (pooled relative risk (RR) = 1.15; 95% CI: 1.09-1.20). Heterogeneity among this body of literature was minimal (I2 = 2.7%) Among studies that measured sun exposure over different life periods, sun avoidance during adolescence appeared to confer a qualitatively greater risk of breast cancer than that closer to diagnosis (pooled RR = 1.18; 95% CI: 1.05-1.30 vs. 1.05; 95% CI: 0.88-1.25).Conclusion: This is the first meta-analysis to estimate the risk of developing breast cancer associated with sun avoidance. The results of this study suggest that obtaining less than one hour of sun per day during summer months, especially in adolescence, could increase the risk of developing breast 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.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.030
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISEE Conference AbstractsSame topicNutrition, Genetics, and DiseaseFrench-language works237,207