ArticleTobacco use insights2024
Activity of the Tobacco Industry in Research and Scientific Literature.
Article in Tobacco use insights, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The respiratory health effects of heated tobacco product aerosols in a primary human airway epithelial cell model.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2026Article
- Nicotine pouch pharmacokinetics compared to smoked tobacco: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Drug and alcohol dependence reports · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Tobacco companies conduct and fund research. They are not always interested in open-ended research. They promote their interests through public relations campaigns. It's a proven fact that they influence the scientific community by impairing scientific reputation, especially in the case of health-related research. Methods: To obtain a comprehensive picture of research and funding activities of the tobacco industry as well as studies about the tobacco industry, respective scientific articles were analyzed in terms of temporal aspects, research areas, networking, and funding sources using established and advanced bibliometric methods. Results: We found the foci of publications with tobacco industry involvement or funding were mainly in chemistry, toxicology, pharmacology, and agricultural sciences. Health-related scopes occurred much less frequently. In contrast, health and medical sciences were the main focus of publications on the tobacco industry. The Chinese state-owned CNTC was the most research-involved tobacco company and often networked with Chinese academic institutions. Whereas, Western universities, on the other hand, collaborated with tobacco companies to a much lesser extent. Conclusion: Conflicts of interest of researchers or academic institutions with the tobacco industry occur repeatedly. That is highly problematic and should not be ignored by the scientific community. The science and the public should be skeptical about tobacco industry-supported research.
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.