↓ Skip to main content

Consumption of Fish Is Not Associated with Risk of Differentiated Thyroid Carcinoma in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) Study.

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Nutrition, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Consumption of Fish Is Not Associated with Risk of Differentiated Thyroid Carcinoma in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) Study.
Published in
Journal of Nutrition, June 2017
DOI 10.3945/jn.117.247874
Pubmed ID
Authors

Raul Zamora-Ros, Jazmín Castañeda, Sabina Rinaldi, Valerie Cayssials, Nadia Slimani, Elisabete Weiderpass, Konstantinos K Tsilidis, Marie-Christine Boutron-Ruault, Kim Overvad, Anne K Eriksen, Anne Tjønneland, Tilman Kühn, Verena Katzke, Heiner Boeing, Antonia Trichopoulou, Carlo La Vecchia, Anastasia Kotanidou, Domenico Palli, Sara Grioni, Amalia Mattiello, Rosario Tumino, Veronica Sciannameo, Eiliv Lund, Susana Merino, Elena Salamanca-Fernández, Pilar Amiano, José María Huerta, Aurelio Barricarte, Ulrika Ericson, Martin Almquist, Joakim Hennings, Maria Sandström, H Bas Bueno-de-Mesquita, Petra H Peeters, Kay-Tee Khaw, Nicholas J Wareham, Julie A Schmidt, Amanda J Cross, Elio Riboli, Augustin Scalbert, Isabelle Romieu, Antonio Agudo, Silvia Franceschi

Abstract

Background: Differentiated thyroid cancer (TC) is the most common endocrine cancer. Fish can be an important source of iodine and other micronutrients and contaminants that may affect the thyroid gland and TC risk.Objective: We prospectively evaluated the relations between the consumption of total fish and different fish types and shellfish and TC risk in the EPIC (European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition) study.Methods: EPIC is a cohort of >500,000 men and women, mostly aged 35-70 y, who were recruited in 10 European countries. After a mean follow-up of 14 y, 748 primary differentiated TC cases were diagnosed; 666 were in women and 601 were papillary TC. Data on intakes of lean fish, fatty fish, fish products, and shellfish were collected by using country-specific validated dietary questionnaires at recruitment. Multivariable Cox regression was used to calculate HRs and 95% CIs adjusted for many potential confounders, including dietary and nondietary factors.Results: No significant association was observed between total fish consumption and differentiated TC risk for the highest compared with the lowest quartile (HR: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.81, 1.32; P-trend = 0.67). Likewise, no significant association was observed with the intake of any specific type of fish, fish product, or shellfish. No significant heterogeneity was found by TC subtype (papillary or follicular tumors), by sex, or between countries with low and high TC incidence.Conclusion: This large study shows that the intake of fish and shellfish was not associated with differentiated TC risk in Europe, a region in which iodine deficiency or excess is rare.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 69 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 16%
Student > Master 7 10%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 7%
Student > Postgraduate 4 6%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 28 41%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 32%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 13%
Environmental Science 3 4%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 1%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 30 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 July 2017.
All research outputs
#6,971,414
of 24,289,456 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Nutrition
#4,362
of 9,721 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,448
of 320,991 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Nutrition
#26
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,289,456 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 70th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,721 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 320,991 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.