Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38859810›Full record

ArticleRevista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health2024

Tobacco industry strategies to influence the regulation of new and emerging tobacco and nicotine products in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Eric Crosbie, Brian Tran, Beatriz Albuquerque de Figueiredo, Luciana Severini, Gianella Severini, Ernesto M Sebrié

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

6 authors.

Eric CrosbieSchool of Public Health University of Nevada Reno RenoNV United States of America School of Public Health, University of Nevada Reno, Reno, NV, United States of America.
Brian TranSchool of Public Health University of Nevada Reno RenoNV United States of America School of Public Health, University of Nevada Reno, Reno, NV, United States of America.
Beatriz Albuquerque de FigueiredoCampaign for Tobacco-Free Kids Washington, D.C. United States of America Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, Washington, D.C., United States of America.
Luciana SeveriniPan American Health Organization Washington, D.C. United States of America Pan American Health Organization, Washington, D.C., United States of America.
Gianella SeveriniCampaign for Tobacco-Free Kids Washington, D.C. United States of America Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, Washington, D.C., United States of America.
Ernesto M SebriéCampaign for Tobacco-Free Kids Washington, D.C. United States of America Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, Washington, D.C., United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To document tobacco industry strategies to influence regulation of new and emerging tobacco and nicotine products (NETNPs) in Latin America and the Caribbean. Methods: We analyzed industry websites, advocacy reports, news media and government documents related to NETNPs, focusing on electronic cigarettes and heated tobacco products. We also conducted a survey of leading health advocates. We applied the policy dystopia model to analyze industry action and argument-based strategies on NETNP regulations. Results: Industry actors engaged in four instrumental strategies to influence NETNP regulation - coalition management, information management, direct involvement in and access to the policy process, and litigation. Their actions included: lobbying key policy-makers, academics and vaping associations; providing grants to media groups to disseminate favorable NETNP information; participating in public consultations; presenting at public hearings; inserting industry-inspired language into draft NETNP legislation; and filing lawsuits to challenge NETNP bans. The industry disseminated its so-called harm reduction argument through large/influential countries (e.g., Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico). Industry discursive strategies claimed NETNPs were less harmful, provided safer alternatives, and should be regulated as so-called harm reduction products or have fewer restrictions on their sale and use than those currently in place. Conclusion: Our analysis provides a better understanding of industry strategies to undermine tobacco and nicotine control. To help counter industry efforts, health advocates should proactively strengthen government capacities and alert policy-makers to industry attempts to create new regulatory categories (so-called reduced-risk products), provide misleading information of government authorizations of NETNPs, and co-opt so-called harm-reduction messages that serve the industry's agenda.

Indexed as

CaribbeanElectronic nicotine delivery systemsLatin Americatobacco controltobacco industryvaping

Identifiers

PMID38859810
PMCPMC11164239

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.