SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2026
Aging and prostate health: meta-analytic insights into age-related prostatic disorders.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and purpose: Prostate health conditions, including benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and prostate cancer (PCa), have historically been linked to aging. Nevertheless, previous studies have not sufficiently addressed detection bias arising from increased prostate screening in older males, which may have artificially inflated incidence rates. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to synthesize available evidence on the relationship between aging and prostate disorders while accounting for potential detection bias. Materials and methods: A systematic literature search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and the NCBI Trials registry for studies published up to June 2024. Studies reporting age-related prevalence of risk estimates for PCa or BPH were included. Pooled prevalence estimates were synthesized using both fixed-effects and random-effects meta-analytic models. Between-study heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran's Q test and the I Results: Eighteen studies (12 on PCa and six on BPH) involving 21483 participants were included in the final analysis. Under the random-effects model, the pooled prevalence estimate for PCa was 0.966 (95% CI: 0.886-0.991), while pooled prevalence estimate for BPH was 0.132 (95% CI: 0.068-0.241). substantial between-study heterogeneity was observed (I Conclusions: This meta-analysis demonstrates a substantial prevalence of prostate disorders in aging male populations. However, considerable heterogeneity across studies suggests that differences in population characteristics, study design, and screening intensity may influence the observed associations. These findings highlight the need for future epidemiological studies that better distinguish biological aging effects from diagnostic and surveillance-related factors. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD420251021675.
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.