Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 462

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Intake of Fruits and Vegetables and Risk of Breast Cancer: A Pooled Analysis of Cohort Studies

Open access
Smith-Warner, Stephanie A., Spiegelman, Donna, Yaun, Shiaw-Shyuan, Adami, Hans-Olov, Beeson, W. Lawrence, van den Brandt, Piet A., Folsom, Aaron R., Fraser, Gary E., Freudenheim, Jo L., Goldbohm, R. Alexandra, Graham, Saxon, Miller, Anthony B., Potter, John D., Rohan, Thomas E., Speizer, Frank E., Toniolo, Paolo, Willett, Walter C., Wolk, Alicja, Zeleniuch-Jacquotte, Anne, Hunter, David J.·2001·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: Some epidemiologic studies suggest that elevated fruit and vegetable consumption is associated with a reduced risk of breast cancer. However, most have been case-control studies in which recall and selection bias may influence the results. Additionally, publication bias may have influenced the literature on associations for specific fruit and vegetable subgroups. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between breast cancer and total and specific fruit and vegetable group intakes using standardized exposure definitions. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SELECTION: Eight prospective studies that had at least 200 incident breast cancer cases, assessed usual dietary intake, and completed a validation study of the diet assessment method or a closely related instrument were included in these analyses. DATA EXTRACTION: Using the primary data from each of the studies, we calculated study-specific relative risks (RRs) that were combined using a random-effects model. DATA SYNTHESIS: The studies included 7377 incident invasive breast cancer cases occurring among 351 825 women whose diet was analyzed at baseline. For comparisons of the highest vs lowest quartiles of intake, weak, nonsignificant associations were observed for total fruits (pooled multivariate RR, 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.86-1.00; P for trend =.08), total vegetables (RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.89-1.04; P for trend =.54), and total fruits and vegetables (RR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.86-1.00; P for trend =.12). No additional benefit was apparent in comparisons of the highest and lowest deciles of intake. No associations were observed for green leafy vegetables, 8 botanical groups, and 17 specific fruits and vegetables. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that fruit and vegetable consumption during adulthood is not significantly associated with reduced breast cancer risk.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.285.6.769

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 462

Metadata

Authors
Smith-Warner, S. A., Spiegelman, D., Yaun, S.-S., Adami, H.-O., Beeson, W. L., van den Brandt, P. A., Folsom, A. R., Fraser, G. E., Freudenheim, J. L., Goldbohm, R. A., Graham, S., Miller, A. B., Potter, J. D., Rohan, T. E., Speizer, F. E., Toniolo, P., Willett, W. C., Wolk, A., Zeleniuch-Jacquotte, A., & Hunter, D. J.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2001-02-14
Volume
285
Issue
6
Pages
769
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W1971863166
Cited by
462
References
1
FWCI
41.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.