The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Processed Meat Consumption and Stomach Cancer Risk: A Meta-Analysis
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The relationship between processed meat consumption and the risk of stomach cancer is controversial. We conducted a meta-analysis to summarize available evidence from cohort and case-control studies on this issue. METHODS: We searched Medline for studies of processed meat consumption and stomach cancer published from January 1966 through March 2006. Random-effects models were used to pool the relative risks from individual studies. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Six prospective cohort studies (involving 2209 stomach cancer patients) and nine case-control studies (2495 case patients) were eligible for inclusion in the dose-response meta-analysis of processed meat consumption. The estimated summary relative risks of stomach cancer for an increase in processed meat consumption of 30 g/day, approximately half of an average serving, were 1.15 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.04 to 1.27) for the cohort studies and 1.38 (95% CI = 1.19 to 1.60) for the case-control studies. There was no statistically significant heterogeneity among the cohort studies (P = .42) or among the case-control studies (P = .19). In three cohort and four case-control studies that examined the association between bacon consumption and stomach cancer, the summary relative risk was 1.37 (95% CI = 1.17 to 1.61) for the highest versus lowest intake categories of bacon, without heterogeneity among these studies (P = .66). CONCLUSION: Increased consumption of processed meat is associated with an increased risk of stomach cancer. However, the possibility that the association may be confounded or modified by other factors cannot be ruled out.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Methods for Trend Estimation from Summarized Dose-Response Data, with Applications to Meta-Analysis
Greenland, S., & Longnecker, M. P. (1992) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a116237 · Cited by 2,353
QUANTITATIVE METHODS IN THE REVIEW OF EPIDEMIOLOGIC LITERATURE1
GREENLAND, S. (1987) · Epidemiologic Reviews · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.epirev.a036298 · Cited by 1,644
Inhibitors of endogenous nitrosation mechanisms and implications in human cancer prevention
Bartsch, H., Ohshima, H., & Pignatelli, B. (1988) · Mutation Research - Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis · doi:10.1016/0027-5107(88)90194-7 · Cited by 296
Galanis, D. (1998) · International Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/ije/27.2.173 · Cited by 181
Dietary factors and the risk of gastric cancer in Mexico city
Ward, M. H., & Lopez-Carrillo, L. (1999) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009736 · Cited by 136
van den Brandt, P. A., Botterweck, A. A. M., & Goldbohm, R. A. (2003) · Cancer Causes & Control · doi:10.1023/a:1024979314124 · Cited by 87
Cited by
Diet and the risk of gastric cancer: review of epidemiological evidence
Tsugane, S., & Sasazuki, S. (2007) · Gastric Cancer · doi:10.1007/s10120-007-0420-0 · Cited by 511
Gonzalez, C. A., & Riboli, E. (2010) · European Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2010.07.025 · Cited by 366
Red Meat and Processed Meat Consumption and All-Cause Mortality: A Meta-Analysis
Larsson, S. C., & Orsini, N. (2014) · American Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/aje/kwt261 · Cited by 353
Self-citationDietary Nitrates, Nitrites, and Nitrosamines Intake and the Risk of Gastric Cancer: A Meta-Analysis
Song, P., Wu, L., & Guan, W. (2015) · Nutrients · doi:10.3390/nu7125505 · Cited by 353
Ingested nitrate and nitrite and stomach cancer risk: An updated review
Bryan, N. S., Alexander, D. D., Coughlin, J. R., Milkowski, A. L., & Boffetta, P. (2012) · Food and Chemical Toxicology · doi:10.1016/j.fct.2012.07.062 · Cited by 335
Metadata
- Authors
- Larsson, S. C., Orsini, N., & Wolk, A.
- Venue
- JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2006-08-02
- Volume
- 98
- Issue
- 15
- Pages
- 1078-1087
- ISSN
- 0027-8874 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2105
- OpenAlex
- W2101312299
- Cited by
- 160
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 0.92
- 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: Processed Meat Consumption and Stomach Cancer Risk: A Meta-Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jnci/djj301
- The paper
- Larsson, S. C., Orsini, N., & Wolk, A. (2006). Processed Meat Consumption and Stomach Cancer Risk: A Meta-Analysis. JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djj301
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.