4.7 Article

Estimating LOCP cancer mortality rates in small domains in Spain using its relationship with lung cancer

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 11, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-01765-7

关键词

-

资金

  1. AEI, UE [MTM2017-82553-R]
  2. Proyecto Jovenes Investigadores [PJUPNA2018-11]
  3. [PID2020-113125RB-I00/MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The distribution of lip, oral cavity, and pharynx (LOCP) cancer mortality rates in small domains in Spain remains unknown. This study provides a detailed description of LOCP mortality rates by province, age group, and gender, revealing that males have higher mortality rates than females and these rates increase with age. Regions in the north of Spain show the highest LOCP cancer mortality rates.
The distribution of lip, oral cavity, and pharynx (LOCP) cancer mortality rates in small domains (defined as the combination of province, age group, and gender) remains unknown in Spain. As many of the LOCP risk factors are preventable, specific prevention programmes could be implemented but this requires a clear specification of the target population. This paper provides an in-depth description of LOCP mortality rates by province, age group and gender, giving a complete overview of the disease. This study also presents a methodological challenge. As the number of LOCP cancer cases in small domains (province, age groups and gender) is scarce, univariate spatial models do not provide reliable results or are even impossible to fit. In view of the close link between LOCP and lung cancer, we consider analyzing them jointly by using shared component models. These models allow information-borrowing among diseases, ultimately providing the analysis of cancer sites with few cases at a very disaggregated level. Results show that males have higher mortality rates than females and these rates increase with age. Regions located in the north of Spain show the highest LOCP cancer mortality rates.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据