SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2025
Association between the
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The association of the Objective: To evaluate the association between the Materials and Methods: PubMed, Medline, Ovid, Embase, CNKI, and China Wanfang databases were searched. Association was assessed using odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Moreover, the false-positive reporting probability (FPRP), Bayesian false-finding probability (BFDP), and Venice criteria were used to assess the credibility of statistically significant association. Results: A significantly decreased cervical cancer risk was revealed for the p53 rs1042522 polymorphism (Pro/Pro +Arg/Pro vs. Arg/Arg: OR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.71-0.87; Pro/Pro vs. Arg/Arg: OR = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.70-0.91; Arg/Pro vs. Arg/Arg: OR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.71-0.86; Pro vs. Arg: OR = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.81-0.93) in overall analysis and several subgroup analyses, such as in Caucasians, Asians, Indians, and so on. However, no significant association was found between the p53 rs17878362 polymorphism and cervical cancer risk. Despite these statistically significant results, reliability analysis using FPRP, BFDP, and Venice criteria deemed all associations "unreliable". Conclusions: After considering the reliability of the results, this study indicates that the p53 rs1042522 polymorphism is not associated with the cervical cancer risk.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.