ArticleAmerican journal of public health2009
Tobacco industry efforts to undermine policy-relevant research.
Article in American journal of public health, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 104 citations in OpenAlex.
- Financial Conflicts of Interest and Stance on Tobacco Harm Reduction: A Systematic Review.American journal of public health · 2019Pooled it
- How does the tobacco industry attempt to influence marketing regulations? A systematic review.PloS one · 2014Pooled it
- Information to Improve Public Perceptions of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA's) Tobacco Regulatory Role.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Trial
- Tobacco industry influence on breast cancer research, policy and public opinion: scoping the Truth Tobacco Industry Documents.Tobacco control · 2026Article
- When retraction replaces rebuttal: suppression of critical scholarship on parental alienation.Frontiers in research metrics and analytics · 2026Article
- Perceptions of and responses of young adults who use e-cigarettes to flavour bans in China: a qualitative study.Tobacco control · 2025Article
- Article
- Intimidation against advocates and researchers in the tobacco, alcohol and ultra-processed food spaces: a review.Health promotion international · 2024Review
- The Perils of Partnership: Interactions Between Public Health England, Drinkaware, and the Portman Group Surrounding the Drink Free Days Campaign.International journal of health policy and management · 2024Article
- Misinformation and the epistemic integrity of democracy.Current opinion in psychology · 2023Review
- Editorial: Tobacco industry accountability - Current practices, emerging issues and challenges.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- 'Tobacco control · 2022Article
- The Ubiquitous Experience of Alcohol Industry Involvement in Science: Findings From a Qualitative Interview Study.Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs · 2022Article
- Identifying misleading corporate narratives: The application of linguistic and qualitative methods to commercial determinants of health research.PLOS global public health · 2022Article
- The fallacy of science is science: the impact of conflict of interest in vaping articles.Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2022Article
- Successful countering of tobacco industry efforts to overturn Thailand's ENDS ban.Tobacco control · 2021Article
- Article
- The handling of evidence in national and local policy making: a case study of alcohol industry actor strategies regarding data on on-premise trading hours and violence in Norway.BMC public health · 2019Article
- Article
- The pattern of indoor smoking restriction law transitions, 1970-2009: laws are sticky.American journal of public health · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The tobacco industry, working through third parties to prevent policy-relevant research that adversely affected it between 1988 and 1998, used coordinated, well-funded strategies in repeated attempts to silence tobacco researcher Stanton A. Glantz. Tactics included advertising, litigation, and attempts to have the US Congress cut off the researcher's National Cancer Institute funding. Efforts like these can influence the policymaking process by silencing opposing voices and discouraging other scientists from doing work that may expose them to tobacco industry attacks. The support of highly credible public health organizations and of researchers' employers is crucial to the continued advancement of public health.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.