U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

You searched 8+ million full text articles

Try this search in 34+ million citations and abstracts

PMC Full-Text Search Results

Items: 5

1.
Figure 1

Figure 1. Reference searched and selection of studies in the meta-analysis.. From: Red and Processed Meat Intake Is Associated with Higher Gastric Cancer Risk: A Meta-Analysis of Epidemiological Observational Studies.

Hongcheng Zhu, et al. PLoS One. 2013;8(8):e70955.

CitationFull text

2.
Figure 3

Figure 3. Beeg's test of studies for red meat intake and gastric cancer risk.. From: Red and Processed Meat Intake Is Associated with Higher Gastric Cancer Risk: A Meta-Analysis of Epidemiological Observational Studies.

Hongcheng Zhu, et al. PLoS One. 2013;8(8):e70955.

CitationFull text

3.
Figure 5

Figure 5. Beeg's test of studies for processed meat intake and gastric cancer risk.. From: Red and Processed Meat Intake Is Associated with Higher Gastric Cancer Risk: A Meta-Analysis of Epidemiological Observational Studies.

Hongcheng Zhu, et al. PLoS One. 2013;8(8):e70955.

CitationFull text

4.
Figure 4

Figure 4. Estimates (95% CIs) of beef intake (highest versus lowest category) and gastric cancer risk.. From: Red and Processed Meat Intake Is Associated with Higher Gastric Cancer Risk: A Meta-Analysis of Epidemiological Observational Studies.

Squares indicate study-specific relative risks (size of the square reflects the study-specific statistical weight, i.e., the inverse of the variance); horizontal lines indicate 95% confidence intervals; diamond indicates summary relative risk estimate with its corresponding 95% confidence interval.

Hongcheng Zhu, et al. PLoS One. 2013;8(8):e70955.

CitationFull text

5.
Figure 2

Figure 2. Estimates (95% CIs) of red meat intake (highest versus lowest category) and gastric cancer risk.. From: Red and Processed Meat Intake Is Associated with Higher Gastric Cancer Risk: A Meta-Analysis of Epidemiological Observational Studies.

Squares indicate study-specific relative risks (size of the square reflects the study-specific statistical weight, i.e., the inverse of the variance); horizontal lines indicate 95% confidence intervals; diamond indicates summary relative risk estimate with its corresponding 95% confidence interval.

Hongcheng Zhu, et al. PLoS One. 2013;8(8):e70955.

CitationFull text

Supplemental Content

Recent activity

Clear Turn Off Turn On

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...
You are here: NCBI > Literature > PubMed Central (PMC)
Support Center