AIM To evaluate the preliminary effects of comprehensiveprevention of gastric cancer in Zhuanghe Countyepidemiologically.METHODS:Stratified sampling and cluster sampling wereapplied to define the intervention group and the controlgroup.The prospective cohort study was used for evaluatingthe effect of preventing gastric cancer.The relative risk(RR)and attributable risk percent(AR %)of intervention on gastriccancer death were calculated.Potential years of life lost(PLYY)of the disease was analyzed,and the RR and AR %of PYLL were calculated.Survival analysis was applied amongthe screened patients.RESULTS:In the first 4 years after intervening,the relativerisk(RR)of intervention on death was 0.5059(95 % CI:0.3462～0.7392,P<0.05)with significance statistically.AR %of the intervention on death was 49.41%.The RR ofintervention on cumulative PYLL was 0.6778(95 % CI:0.5604～0.8198,P<0.05)with statistic significance.AR %of the intervention on cumulative PYLL was 30.32 %.Thefour-year survival rate of the screened patients was 0.6751(95 % CI:0.5298～0.9047).CONCLUSION:The initiative intervention results showedthat the intervention approach used in the trial was effective,it reduced mortality and increased survival rate,and alleviatedthe adverse effect of gastric cancer on the health and life.ofscreened population. AIM To evaluate the preliminary effects of comprehensive prevention of gastric cancer in Zhuanghe County epidemiologically. METHODS: Stratified sampling and cluster sampling were applied to define the intervention group and the control group. The prospective cohort study was used for evaluating the effect of preventing gastric cancer. The relative risk ( RR) and attributable risk percent (AR%) of intervention on gastriccancer death were calculated .Potential years of life lost (PLYY) of the disease was analyzed, and the RR and AR% of PYLL were calculated. Survival analysis was applied among the screened patients .RESULTS: In the first 4 years after intervening, the relativerisk (RR) of intervention on death was 0.5059 (95% CI: 0.3462-0.7392, P <0.05) with significant statistically. AR% of the intervention on death was 49.41%. The RR of intervention on cumulative PYLL was 0.6778 (95% CI: 0.5604-0.8198, P <0.05) with statistic significance. AR% of the intervention on cumulative PYLL was 30.32% .Thefour-year survival r ate of the screened patients was 0.6751 (95% CI: 0.5298 ~ 0.9047) .CONCLUSION: The initiative intervention results showed that the intervention approach used in the trial was effective, it reduced mortality and increased survival rate, and alleviated the adverse effect of gastric cancer on the health and life.ofscreened population.