烟草业在研究和科学文献方面的活动。

IF 2.1 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Tobacco Use Insights Pub Date : 2024-08-19 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1177/1179173X241271566
Markus Braun, Doris Klingelhöfer, Dörthe Brüggmann, David A Groneberg
{"title":"烟草业在研究和科学文献方面的活动。","authors":"Markus Braun, Doris Klingelhöfer, Dörthe Brüggmann, David A Groneberg","doi":"10.1177/1179173X241271566","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":43361,"journal":{"name":"Tobacco Use Insights","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11334150/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Activity of the Tobacco Industry in Research and Scientific Literature.\",\"authors\":\"Markus Braun, Doris Klingelhöfer, Dörthe Brüggmann, David A Groneberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1179173X241271566\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":43361,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Tobacco Use Insights\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11334150/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Tobacco Use Insights\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1179173X241271566\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tobacco Use Insights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1179173X241271566","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:烟草公司开展并资助研究。它们并不总是对开放式研究感兴趣。他们通过公关活动来促进自己的利益。事实证明,他们通过损害科学界的声誉来影响科学界,尤其是在与健康相关的研究中:为了全面了解烟草行业的研究和资助活动以及有关烟草行业的研究,我们采用成熟和先进的文献计量学方法,从时间方面、研究领域、网络和资金来源等方面对相关科学文章进行了分析:我们发现,有烟草业参与或资助的出版物主要集中在化学、毒理学、药理学和农业科学领域。与健康相关的领域则较少出现。相比之下,健康和医学科学是有关烟草行业的出版物的主要重点。中国国有企业中国烟草总公司是参与研究最多的烟草企业,并经常与中国的学术机构建立联系。而西方大学与烟草公司的合作则少得多:结论:研究人员或学术机构与烟草行业的利益冲突屡屡发生。结论:研究人员或学术机构与烟草业的利益冲突屡屡发生,这是一个很大的问题,科学界不应忽视。科学界和公众应该对烟草业支持的研究持怀疑态度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Activity of the Tobacco Industry in Research and Scientific Literature.

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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Tobacco Use Insights
Tobacco Use Insights PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
自引率
4.50%
发文量
32
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信