Ecological studycited by the Tayebat archiveabstract only checked★ key study A-ORG-19 in-depth review
US thyroid cancer: more diagnoses, same deaths
Current thyroid cancer trends in the United States.
Overview
Davies L et al.. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2014 · PMID 24557566 · DOI 10.1001/jamaoto.2014.1
Diagnoses nearly tripled from 1975 to 2009 while deaths stayed at about 0.5 per 100,000.
Does the study support the specific claim? Yes · Methodological quality: high
Plain-language summary
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Overdiagnosis
- How was the study done?
Trend analysis
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
SEER 9
- What was actually found?
Incidence up, mortality flat
- How large was the observed effect?
RR 2.9
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Many small cancers found would never have caused harm
- What are the study's limitations?
Ecological
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Supports
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Similar in Europe (not verified here)
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Which individual tumours are harmless
Scientific in-depth review
1. Full reference
- Authors
- Davies L, Welch HG
- Journal
- JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg
- Year
- 2014
- Identifier
- PMID 24557566 DOI 10.1001/jamaoto.2014.1
- Verification
- verified – PubMed E-utilities efetch, 2026-10-25
- Retracted
- no
- Corrections
- none
- Extent checked
- abstract only
- Conflicts of interest and funding
COI: not stated in record | Grants: none listed
2. Research question
Has thyroid cancer incidence stabilized?
3. Study design and population
- Study design
- Ecological study – Ecological secular-trend analysis (SEER 9) with national mortality data
- Population
Adults in 9 SEER areas
- Country
USA
- Period
1975-2009
4. Methods and endpoints
5. Actual results
- Results
Incidence 4.9 -> 14.3 per 100,000 (RR 2.9; 2.7-3.1); papillary 3.4 -> 12.5 (RR 3.7); women increase 14.9 vs men 3.8 per 100,000; mortality stable ~0.5 per 100,000.
- Absolute risks
Absolute increase 9.4 per 100,000
- Authors' conclusion
Ongoing epidemic of diagnosis rather than disease; particularly acute for women.
6. Strengths
- Population registry
- Consistent with autopsy and screening data
7. Weaknesses
- Ecological; cannot prove individual overdiagnosis
8. Risk of bias
- Orienting tool
- none applicable
- Type of assessment
- simplified assessment (abstract only)
- Full formal assessment
- no
- Overall risk of bias
- low
9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation
10. Relevance to the specific claim
Supports C-ORG-14.
11. Independent contrary findings
12. Transferability to Germany and Europe
Similar trends reported internationally (Vaccarella 2016; not abstracted).
13. Overall methodological judgement
Correctly cited.
| Multidimensional assessment | |
|---|---|
| Authenticity of the source | verified |
| Methodological quality | high |
| Risk of bias | low |
| Precision of results | high |
| Directness | direct |
| Reproducibility | replicated |
| Consistency with the overall evidence | consistent |
| Regional transferability | moderate |
| Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive) | essentially correct but incomplete |
14. Open questions
15. Linked fact checks
- Thyroid cancer diagnoses tripled (US 1975-2009) while mortality stayed flat — an epidemic of diagnosis (overdiagnosis), driving avoidable thyroid surgery. – Studies supporting the claim
- No working organ should be removed (e.g., a thyroid with nodules that still functions); one should stay away from the scalpel, and Elawady is 'against any operation, including caesarean section'. – Studies supporting the claim
Use by the Tayebat archive
Note: according to the archive, the studies were compiled by the archive operators. Whether Dr. Elawady himself cited this study is not established.
- What the archive says about the study
US thyroid cancer incidence tripled while mortality stayed flat — an epidemic of diagnosis driving avoidable thyroidectomies.
- A. What was actually studied?
Thyroid cancer trends
- B. What did the authors find?
Incidence nearly tripled; mortality flat
- C. What conclusions do the authors themselves draw?
Epidemic of diagnosis
- D. What does the archive derive from it?
Used to argue that screening-driven thyroid surgery is often unnecessary.
- E. Is this derivation scientifically justified?
Numbers correct. 'Avoidable thyroidectomies' is a reasonable inference (overdiagnosis leads to overtreatment) but is not measured in this study.
- Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive)
- essentially correct but incomplete