Ca(2+)/Finding
One finding, on its own
A single claim from the graph, with the evidence strength computed from its study, the sentence it was drawn from, and the paper. This address does not change.
Ca(2+) — decreases prostate cancer incidence
Evidence strength: very limited.Finding“In the meta-analysis of trial-level data, allocation to Ca did not alter the risk of total cancer (relative risk 0·95, 95% CI 0·76, 1·18, P= 0·63), colorectal cancer (relative risk 1·38, 95% CI 0·89, 2·15, P= 0·15), breast cancer (relative risk 1·01, 95% CI 0·64, 1·59, P= 0·97) or cancer-related mortality (relative risk 0·96, 95% CI 0·74, 1·24, P= 0·75), but reduced the risk of prostate cancer (relative risk 0·54, 95 % CI 0·30, 0·96, P= 0·03), although there were few events.”
Quoted verbatim from Calcium supplements and cancer risk: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.. - Study
- meta-analysis
- Dose
- Ca supplements of at least 500 mg/d, without co-administered vitamin D
- Population
- Participants in placebo-controlled randomised trials of calcium supplements without co-administered vitamin D (ten trials with trial-level data, mean duration 3.9 years)
Effect 0.54 risk ratio, 95% CI 0.3 to 0.96
Calcium supplements and cancer risk: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.2013PMID:2360186110.1017/S0007114513001050Permalink
To cite this finding: https://catalystproject.ai/e/01M5S75DH251A70DN3Z1QVJA2K