You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
PostScript
Letter
Study design biases in pancreatic inflammatory diseases
  1. Giulia Martina Cavestro1,
  2. Alberto Mariani1,
  3. Satish K Singh2,
  4. Paolo Giorgio Arcidiacono1,
  5. Pier Alberto Testoni1
  1. 1Vita-Salute San Raffaele University Division of Gastroenterology and Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Scientific Institute San Raffaele, Milano, Italy
  2. 2Section of Gastroenterology, Boston University School of Medicine and Boston Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Giulia Martina Cavestro, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University Division of Gastroenterology and Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, Scientific Institute San Raffaele, Via Olgettina 60 Milano, Italy; cavestro.giuliamartina{at}hsr.it

https://doi.org/10.1136/gutjnl-2012-302337

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    The recent report by Sadr-Azodi et al entitled ‘Cigarette smoking, smoking cessation and acute pancreatitis: a prospective population-based study,’1 suggests that smoking is an important risk factor for non-gallstone-related acute pancreatitis.

    In this study, the examined populations consisted of participants from the Swedish Mammography Cohort (SMC) established between 1987 and 1990. A questionnaire pertaining to diet, body size and education was mailed to 90 303 women born between 1914 and 1948; 66 651 women (74%) returned the questionnaire. In 1997, all surviving participants (56 030) received a new expanded questionnaire regarding anthropometric and lifestyle factors, including smoking status: 38 988 women returned a completed questionnaire. In addition in 1997, a questionnaire identical to the one …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Competing interests None.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.