| Title |
Association between cooking oil fume exposure and lung cancer among Chinese nonsmoking women: a meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
OncoTargets and therapy, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ott.s100949 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yingbo Xue, Ying Jiang, Shan Jin, Yong Li |
| Abstract |
Lung cancer has been the main cause of cancer death around the world. Cigarette smoking has been identified as a risk factor for lung cancer in males. However, the etiological factors in nonsmoking women remain elusive. A meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the relationship between cooking oil fume exposure and lung cancer among Chinese nonsmoking women. Thirteen articles containing three population-based case-control and ten hospital-based case-control studies were included in this meta-analysis. These studies with a total of 3,596 lung cancer women and 6,082 healthy controls were analyzed by RevMan 5.3. Fixed effects model or random effects model was used to obtain pooled estimates of risk ratio. The risk ratios with a 95% CI were 1.74 (95% CI =1.57-1.94) and 2.11 (95% CI =1.54-2.89), respectively. Cooking oil fume exposure as well as not using a kitchen ventilator when cooking was significantly associated with lung cancer among nonsmoking women (Z=10.07, P<0.00001; Z=4.65, P<0.00001). Cooking oil fume exposure, especially lacking a fume extractor, may increase the risk of lung cancer among Chinese nonsmoking women. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 60 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 9 | 15% |
| United Kingdom | 9 | 15% |
| Australia | 2 | 3% |
| Comoros | 2 | 3% |
| Indonesia | 1 | 2% |
| Turkey | 1 | 2% |
| Malta | 1 | 2% |
| South Africa | 1 | 2% |
| Brazil | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 8 | 13% |
| Unknown | 25 | 42% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 51 | 85% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 7 | 12% |
| Scientists | 2 | 3% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 60 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 60 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 15% |
| Researcher | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 13 | 22% |
| Unknown | 19 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 20% |
| Environmental Science | 7 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 8% |
| Engineering | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 13% |
| Unknown | 18 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 48. 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 30 December 2023.
All research outputs
#889,997
of 25,848,323 outputs
Outputs from OncoTargets and therapy
#18
of 3,017 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,295
of 312,842 outputs
Outputs of similar age from OncoTargets and therapy
#1
of 123 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,848,323 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,017 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 312,842 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 123 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.