Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 587

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 77 of the 77 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Meat Consumption and Risk of Colorectal Cancer

Chao, Ann·2005·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: Consumption of red and processed meat has been associated with colorectal cancer in many but not all epidemiological studies; few studies have examined risk in relation to long-term meat intake or the association of meat with rectal cancer. OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between recent and long-term meat consumption and the risk of incident colon and rectal cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A cohort of 148 610 adults aged 50 to 74 years (median, 63 years), residing in 21 states with population-based cancer registries, who provided information on meat consumption in 1982 and again in 1992/1993 when enrolled in the Cancer Prevention Study II (CPS II) Nutrition Cohort. Follow-up from time of enrollment in 1992/1993 through August 31, 2001, identified 1667 incident colorectal cancers. Participants contributed person-years at risk until death or a diagnosis of colon or rectal cancer. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Incidence rate ratio (RR) of colon and rectal cancer. RESULTS: High intake of red and processed meat reported in 1992/1993 was associated with higher risk of colon cancer after adjusting for age and energy intake but not after further adjustment for body mass index, cigarette smoking, and other covariates. When long-term consumption was considered, persons in the highest tertile of consumption in both 1982 and 1992/1993 had higher risk of distal colon cancer associated with processed meat (RR, 1.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-2.17), and ratio of red meat to poultry and fish (RR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.08-2.18) relative to those persons in the lowest tertile at both time points. Long-term consumption of poultry and fish was inversely associated with risk of both proximal and distal colon cancer. High consumption of red meat reported in 1992/1993 was associated with higher risk of rectal cancer (RR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.15-2.52; P = .007 for trend), as was high consumption reported in both 1982 and 1992/1993 (RR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.00-2.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate the potential value of examining long-term meat consumption in assessing cancer risk and strengthen the evidence that prolonged high consumption of red and processed meat may increase the risk of cancer in the distal portion of the large intestine.

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.293.2.172

Cites

77 of 77 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

Show all 77 references

Cited by

See all 587

Metadata

Authors
Chao, A.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2005-01-12
Volume
293
Issue
2
Pages
172
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2123937146
Cited by
587
References
77
FWCI
45.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Meat Consumption and Risk of Colorectal Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.293.2.172
The paper
Chao, A. (2005). Meat Consumption and Risk of Colorectal Cancer. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.293.2.172

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.