Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41225626›Full record

ArticleGlobalization and health2025

Do alcohol industry-funded organisations act to correct misinformation? A qualitative study of pregnancy and infant health content following independent analysis.

Gemma Mitchell, Chris Baker, May Ci van Schalkwyk, Nason Maani, Mark Petticrew

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Globalization and health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Gemma MitchellInstitute for Social Marketing and Health, Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport, University of Stirling, Stirling, FK9 4LA, UK. gemma.mitchell@stir.ac.uk.
Chris BakerDepartment of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology, Faculty of Epidemiology and Public Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London, WC1H 9SH, UK.
May Ci van SchalkwykCentre for Pesticide Suicide Prevention, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, WC1H 9SH, UK.
Nason MaaniGlobal Health Policy Unit, School of Social and Political Science, College of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Edinburgh, 15a George Square, Edinburgh, EH8 9LD, UK.
Mark PetticrewDepartment of Public Health, Environments and Society, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London, WC1H 9SH, UK. mark.petticrew@lshtm.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccess to reliable, accurate, and up-to-date health information is a crucial component of global population health. Like other health-harming industries, the alcohol industry is known to provide misinformation to the public, including on alcohol, pregnancy, and infant health. It is unknown whether industry information changes following independent public health analysis.

methodsWe extracted data using the homepage, menu, and search tool functions (where available) from seven industry-funded charity and nonprofit company websites (Aware, South Africa; Drinkaware, Ireland; Drinkaware, United Kingdom; Éduc'alcool, Canada; DrinkWise, Australia; Foundation for Advancing Alcohol Responsibility, United States; and International Alliance for Responsible Drinking) that have previously been found to misrepresent the evidence on alcohol, pregnancy, and infant health. We conducted a qualitative, thematic analysis using a published framework of 'dark nudges and sludge' misinformation techniques.

resultsOmission of information, functionality problems, and the positioning and sequencing of information in ways that framed or obfuscated its meaning were the most common forms of misinformation identified. These types of misinformation were often mixed with (limited) relevant information and were most often found in combination. We found pregnancy and infant health information for the consumer on five of the seven websites studied (Drinkaware, Ireland; Drinkaware, United Kingdom; DrinkWise; Éduc'alcool; and Aware). Information on pregnancy and fetal alcohol spectrum disorder was found on these five sites, although they did not all provide information on miscarriage, breastfeeding, or fertility. We could not find any pregnancy and infant health information directed to the consumer on the remaining sites (Foundation for Advancing Alcohol Responsibility and International Alliance for Responsible Drinking). Six of the seven websites had a search tool function; these often produced irrelevant information.

conclusionsFollowing independent public health analysis of their informational outputs, misinformation about pregnancy and infant health remains present on alcohol industry-funded websites. Warnings to the public to avoid alcohol industry-funded information sources should form an essential part of the global effort to tackle health misinformation.

Indexed as

Alcohol DrinkingAlcoholic BeveragesCommunicationFood IndustryInfant HealthFemaleHumansInfantPregnancyQualitative ResearchAlcoholAlcohol industryCommercial determinants of healthCorporate political activityCorporate social responsibilityHealth promotionMisinformationPregnancy and infant health

Identifiers

PMID41225626
PMCPMC12613373

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.