Table 3

Sensitivity analyses of risk of lung cancer for cooking and/or heating with biomass fuels for women

Sensitivity analysis
Group#Sub-groupNumber
of studies
Heterogeneity
(I2; p-value)
OR (95% CI)
FE=fixed effects
p ValueReferences
All1All studies1251% (p=0.008)1.20 (0.95 to 1.52)0.124 6 7 11 14–22
2Clean fuel comparison556% (p=0.04)1.95 (1.16 to 3.27)0.014 11 14 17 19
Design3Hospital957% (p=0.005)1.31 (0.95 to 1.80)0.104 6 7 11 15–17 19 21
4Population20%0.89 (0.58 to 1.37) (FE)0.5918 20
5Mixed*1N/A1.19 (0.94 to 1.51)0.1514
Strong or moderate adjustment6All1151% (p=0.01)1.23 (0.98 to 1.55)0.074–7 11 14 15 17–19 21
7Clean fuel comparison†556% (p=0.04)1.95 (1.16 to 3.27)0.014 11 14 17 19
8Clean fuel comparison, excluding kerosene in comparison group464% (p=0.03)2.33 (1.23 to 4.42)0.014 14 17 19
Asia and Mexico9All1153% (p=0.006)1.22 (0.93 to 1.61)0.164 6 7 11 15–21
10Clean fuel comparison421% (p=0.28)2.33 (1.46 to 3.72) (FE)0.00044 11 17 19
11Clean fuel comparison, excluding kerosene in comparison group30%3.26 (1.88 to 5.65) (FE)<0.00014 17 19
Europe, North America, Brazil12All (all clean fuel)*1N/A1.19 (0.94 to 1.51)0.1514
Non-smokers only‡13All466% (p=0.007)1.14 (0.78 to 1.67)0.506 7 19 21
14Clean fuel comparison1N/A2.75 (0.85 to 8.86)0.0919
  • Pooling was carried out with random effects unless specified (FE).

  • *This report14 is a pooled analysis of four separate studies from Europe and North America (see table 2 for details).

  • †This sub-analysis includes the same studies as sub-analysis #2.

  • ‡All results in this sensitivity analysis are women only.

  • Bold results identify those significant at (or below) the 0.01 level.