20
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Health effects associated with smoking: a Burden of Proof study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          As a leading behavioral risk factor for numerous health outcomes, smoking is a major ongoing public health challenge. Although evidence on the health effects of smoking has been widely reported, few attempts have evaluated the dose–response relationship between smoking and a diverse range of health outcomes systematically and comprehensively. In the present study, we re-estimated the dose–response relationships between current smoking and 36 health outcomes by conducting systematic reviews up to 31 May 2022, employing a meta-analytic method that incorporates between-study heterogeneity into estimates of uncertainty. Among the 36 selected outcomes, 8 had strong-to-very-strong evidence of an association with smoking, 21 had weak-to-moderate evidence of association and 7 had no evidence of association. By overcoming many of the limitations of traditional meta-analyses, our approach provides comprehensive, up-to-date and easy-to-use estimates of the evidence on the health effects of smoking. These estimates provide important information for tobacco control advocates, policy makers, researchers, physicians, smokers and the public.

          Abstract

          A meta-analysis using the Burden of proof method reported consistent evidence supporting harmful associations between smoking and 28 different health outcomes.

          Related collections

          Most cited references213

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews

          The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement

              David Moher and colleagues introduce PRISMA, an update of the QUOROM guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                xdai88@uw.edu
                Journal
                Nat Med
                Nat Med
                Nature Medicine
                Nature Publishing Group US (New York )
                1078-8956
                1546-170X
                10 October 2022
                10 October 2022
                2022
                : 28
                : 10
                : 2045-2055
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.34477.33, ISNI 0000000122986657, Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, , University of Washington, ; Seattle, WA USA
                [2 ]GRID grid.34477.33, ISNI 0000000122986657, Department of Health Metrics Sciences, School of Medicine, , University of Washington, ; Seattle, WA USA
                [3 ]GRID grid.34477.33, ISNI 0000000122986657, Department of Applied Mathematics, , University of Washington, ; Seattle, WA USA
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0289-7814
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0611-7272
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9749-8033
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4930-9450
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8992-591X
                Article
                1978
                10.1038/s41591-022-01978-x
                9556318
                36216941
                fd36dda7-d208-4e86-9eed-857e7d2956e6
                © The Author(s) 2022

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 11 April 2022
                : 28 July 2022
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef https://doi.org/10.13039/100000865, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation);
                Funded by: FundRef https://doi.org/10.13039/100007500, Bloomberg Family Foundation (Bloomber Philanthropies);
                Funded by: The funders for this study are listed in full under Xiaochen Dai.
                Categories
                Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature America, Inc. 2022

                Medicine
                risk factors,cancer
                Medicine
                risk factors, cancer

                Comments

                Comment on this article