Table 1.

Criteria for Continuous Update Project Panel Conclusion.

Conclusion	Criteria
Convincing (strong evidence)	Evidence strong enough to support a judgment of a convincing causal (or protective) relationship, which justifies making recommendations designed to reduce the risk of cancer. The evidence is robust enough to be unlikely to be modified in the foreseeable future as new evidence accumulates.
Probable (strong evidence)	Evidence strong enough to support a judgment of a probable causal (or protective) relationship, which generally justifies recommendations designed to reduce the risk of cancer.
Limited—suggestive	Evidence that is too limited to permit a probable or convincing causal judgment but is suggestive of a direction of effect. The evidence may be limited in amount or by methodological flaws, but shows a generally consistent direction of effect. This judgement is very rarely sufficient to justify recommendations designed to reduce the risk of cancer; any exceptions to this require special, explicit justification.
Limited—no conclusion	Evidence is so limited that no firm conclusion can be made. This judgment represents an entry level and is intended to allow any exposure for which there are sufficient data to warrant Panel consideration, but where insufficient evidence exists to permit a more definitive grading.
Substantial effect on risk unlikely (strong evidence)	Evidence is strong enough to support a judgment that a particular food, nutrition, or physical activity exposure is unlikely to have a substantial causal relation to a cancer outcome. The evidence should be robust enough to be unlikely to be modified in the foreseeable future as new evidence accumulates.