Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32019742›Full record

SynthesisBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2020

Association between financial links to indoor tanning industry and conclusions of published studies on indoor tanning: systematic review.

Lola Adekunle, Rebecca Chen, Lily Morrison, Meghan Halley, Victor Eng, Yogi Hendlin, Mackenzie R Wehner, Mary-Margaret Chren, Eleni Linos

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Navigating the Prescription Drug Information System.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Lola AdekunleDepartment of Dermatology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA 94305, USA.
Rebecca ChenDepartment of Dermatology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA 94305, USA.
Lily MorrisonDepartment of Dermatology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA 94305, USA.
Meghan HalleyDepartment of Dermatology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA 94305, USA.
Victor EngDepartment of Dermatology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA 94305, USA.
Yogi HendlinSchool of Philosophy Erasmus University, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Mackenzie R WehnerDepartment of Dermatology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Mary-Margaret ChrenDepartment of Dermatology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
Eleni LinosDepartment of Dermatology, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA 94305, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5856-6301

Funding

Penn Dermatology Research Training ProgramT32AR007465 · NIAMS · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI Elizabeth Anne Grice, David Joel Margolis · 1986 to 2026
$9.0M
Targeted Advertising for Cancer PreventionDP2CA225433 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI LINOS, ELENI · 2017 to 2019
$2.9M
Patient Oriented Research in Vulnerable Populations with Skin DiseaseK24AR075060 · NIAMS · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI Eleni Linos · 2019 to 2026
$1.6M
The e-Itch Vital Signs: development of a new mobile outcomes measure for clinical trials in patients with chronic itchR01AR073001 · NIAMS · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI CHREN, MARY-MARGARET · 2018 to 2020
$640k
NCI NIH HHS DP2 CA225433NIAMS NIH HHS K24 AR075060NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR073001NIAMS NIH HHS T32 AR007465
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess whether an association exists between financial links to the indoor tanning industry and conclusions of indoor tanning literature.

designSystematic review. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science, up to 15 February 2019. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Articles discussing indoor tanning and health were eligible for inclusion, with no article type restrictions (original research, systematic reviews, review articles, case reports, editorials, commentaries, and letters were all eligible). Basic science studies, articles describing only indoor tanning prevalence, non-English articles, and articles without full text available were excluded.

results691 articles were included in analysis, including empiric articles (eg, original articles or systematic reviews) (357/691; 51.7%) and non-empiric articles letters (eg, commentaries, letters, or editorials) (334/691; 48.3%). Overall, 7.2% (50/691) of articles had financial links to the indoor tanning industry; 10.7% (74/691) articles favored indoor tanning, 3.9% (27/691) were neutral, and 85.4% (590/691) were critical of indoor tanning. Among the articles without industry funding, 4.4% (27/620) favored indoor tanning, 3.5% (22/620) were neutral, and 92.1% (571/620) were critical of indoor tanning. Among the articles with financial links to the indoor tanning industry, 78% (39/50) favored indoor tanning, 10% (5/50) were neutral, and 12% (6/50) were critical of indoor tanning. Support from the indoor tanning industry was significantly associated with favoring indoor tanning (risk ratio 14.3, 95% confidence interval 10.0 to 20.4).

conclusionsAlthough most articles in the indoor tanning literature are independent of industry funding, articles with financial links to the indoor tanning industry are more likely to favor indoor tanning. Public health practitioners and researchers need to be aware of and account for industry funding when interpreting the evidence related to indoor tanning. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019123617.

Indexed as

Conflict of InterestHumansIndustryNeoplasms, Radiation-InducedResearch Support as TopicSkin NeoplasmsSunbathingUltraviolet Rays

Identifiers

PMID32019742
PMCPMC7190068

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.