Table 4 Comparison of individual and overall (random-effects) estimates for the two reviews – pancreatic cancer
| Â | ST usea | Â | Â | Â | Â | Â | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ref | Type | Exposure | Inclusion of smokersb | Reviewc | Sex | Relative risk (95% CI) | Comments |
[26] | ST | Ever | SNS | L&H | M | 1.7 (0.9–3.1) |  |
|  | ST | Ever | SNS | B | M | 1.7 (0.9–3.1) | Estimates agree |
[4] | Snuff | Ever | SNS | L&H | M | 1.67 (1.12–2.50) | Estimates for NS also available |
|  | Snuff | Ever | SNS | B | M | 1.7 (1.1–2.5) | Estimates agreed |
[5] | Snuff | Ever | SNS | L&H | M | 0.9 (0.7–1.2) |  |
|  | Snuff | Ever | NS | B | M | 2.0 (1.2–3.3) | NS not SNS |
[27] | ST | Ever | SNS | L&H | M | 0.29 (0.09–0.92)e | Not included by B |
[28] | Chew | Ever | NS | L&H | M | 2.82 (0.85–9.39) | Personal communication from Dr Muscat |
|  | Chew | Ever | NSf | B | M | 3.6 (1.0–12.8) | Estimate actually for non-current smokers |
[29] | ST | Ever | NSg | L&H | M+F | 1.1 (0.4–3.1) |  |
|  | ST | Ever | NS | B | M+F | 1.4 (0.5–3.6) | Estimate biased as pipe and cigar smokers included in numerator only |
[30] | ST | Ever | SNS | L&H | M+F | 0.65 (0.43–0.97)e | Estimate for NS also available |
|  | Chew | Ever | NS | B | M+F | 0.6 (0.3–1.4) | Chew not ST; NS not SNS |
Total |  |  |  | L&H |  | 1.07 (0.71–1.60) | 7 estimates |
|  |  |  |  | B |  | 1.6 (1.1–2.2) | 6 estimates |