Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25467283›Full record

ArticleHealth policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2015

Old wine in new bottles: tobacco industry's submission to European Commission tobacco product directive public consultation.

Heikki Hiilamo, Stanton A Glantz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 32% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Heikki HiilamoHelsinki University, Faculty of Social Sciences, PO Box 16, 00014 Helsinki, Finland. Electronic address: heikki.hiilamo@helsinki.fi.
Stanton A GlantzDepartment of Medicine Center for Tobacco Control Research & Education Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94143-1390, United States.
University of California, San Francisco · USUniversity of Helsinki · FI

Funding

ANALYSIS OF TOBACCO INDUSTRY DOCUMENTSR01CA087472 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI LING, PAMELA MAY · 2000 to 2018
$12.5M
NCI NIH HHS CA-087472NCI NIH HHS R01 CA087472
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Between September and December 2010 the European Commission Health & Consumer Protection Directorate-General (DGSANCO) held a public consultation on a possible revision of the European Union Tobacco Products Directive (2001/37/EC). We used content analysis of the tobacco industry's and related parties' 300 submissions to the public consultation to determine if tobacco industry and its allies in Europe are prepared to reduce harm of the tobacco products as their public statements assert. The industry submission resorted to traditional tobacco industry arguments where illicit trade and freedom of choice were emphasized and misrepresented the conclusions of a DGSANCO-commissioned scientific report on smokeless tobacco products. Retailers and wholesalers referred to employment and economic growth more often than respondents from other categories. The pattern of responses in the submission differed dramatically from independent public opinion polls of EU citizens' support for tobacco control policies. None of the major tobacco manufacturers or their lobbying organizations supported any of the DGSANCO's proposed evidence based interventions (pictorial health warnings, plain packaging or point-of-sale display bans) to reduce harms caused by cigarette smoking.

Indexed as

European UnionHealth PolicyHumansLobbyingProduct PackagingSmoking PreventionTobacco IndustryTobacco UsePolicy makingPublic commentsRegulations

Identifiers

PMID25467283
PMCPMC4453831
OpenAlexW2115442376

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.