The ‘snowball effect’: short and long-term consequences of early career alcohol industry research funding

References

• Adams PJ. 2016. Moral jeopardy: risks of accepting money from the alcohol, tobacco and gambling industries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Andréasson S, McCambridge J. 2017. Uncertainty, risk, norms, and evidence: the INEBRIA position statement. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 78:333–334.
   Google Scholar
• Babor TF. 2009. Alcohol research and the alcoholic beverage industry: issues, concerns and conflicts of interest. Addiction. 104(s1):34–47.
   Google Scholar
• Babor TF, Robaina K. 2013. Public health, academic medicine, and the alcohol industry’s corporate social responsibility activities. Am J Public Health. 103(2):206–214.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bero L. 2003. Implications of the tobacco industry documents for public health and policy. Annu Rev Public Health. 24(1):267–288.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bero L. 2005. Tobacco industry manipulation of research. Public Health Rep. 120(2):200–208.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bond L, Daube M, Chikritzhs T. 2009. Access to confidential alcohol industry documents: from ‘Big Tobacco’ to ‘Big Booze’. Australasian Med J. 1(3):1–26.
   Google Scholar
• Braun V, Clarke V. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 3(2):77–101.
   Google Scholar
• Braun V, Clarke V, Hayfield N, Terry G. 2019. Thematic analysis. In: Liamputtong P, editor. Handbook of research methods in health social sciences. Singapore (Singapore): Springer; p. 843–860.
   Google Scholar
• Chartres N, Fabbri A, McDonald S, Turton J, Allman-Farinelli M, McKenzie J, Bero L. 2019. Association of industry ties with outcomes of studies examining the effect of wholegrain foods on cardiovascular disease and mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 9(5):e022912.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duyx B, Urlings MJE, Swaen GMH, Bouter LM, Zeegers MP. 2020. Determinants of citation in the literature on diesel exhaust exposure and lung cancer: a citation analysis. BMJ Open. 10(10):e033967.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fabbri A, Lai A, Grundy Q, Bero LA. 2018. The influence of industry sponsorship on the research agenda: a scoping review. Am J Public Health. 108(11):e9–e16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Golder S, Garry J, McCambridge J. 2020. Declared funding and authorship by alcohol industry actors in the scientific literature: a bibliometric study. Eur J Public Health. 30(6):1193–1200.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hart B, Lundh A, Bero L. 2012. Effect of reporting bias on meta-analyses of drug trials: reanalysis of meta-analyses. BMJ. 344:d7202.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hawkins B, McCambridge J. 2018. Can internal tobacco industry documents be useful for studying the UK alcohol industry? BMC Public Health. 18(1):808–808.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hendlin YH, Vora M, Elias J, Ling PM. 2019. Financial conflicts of interest and stance on tobacco harm reduction: a systematic review. Am J Public Health. 109(7):e1–e8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hurt RD, Ebbert JO, Muggli ME, Lockhart NJ, Robertson CR. 2009. Open doorway to truth: legacy of the Minnesota tobacco trial. Mayo Clin Proc. 84(5):446–456.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knorr-Cetina K. 1999. Epistemic cultures: how the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Latour B. 1987. Science in action: how to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Latour B, WooIgar S. 1986. Laboratory life: the construction of scientific facts. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lave R, Mirowski P, Randalls S. 2010. Introduction: STS and neoliberal science. Soc Stud Sci. 40(5):659–675.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lesser LI, Ebbeling CB, Goozner M, Wypij D, Ludwig DS. 2007. Relationship between funding source and conclusion among nutrition-related scientific articles. PLoS Med. 4(1):e5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lundh A, Lexchin J, Mintzes B, Schroll JB, Bero L. 2017. Industry sponsorship and research outcome. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2:MR000033.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin CS, Greenfield TK, Babor TF. 2016. The key problem is that alcohol research is underfunded despite large industry profit and billions of dollars in annual alcoholic beverage tax revenues. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 77(4):545–547.  
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCambridge J, Hartwell G. 2015. Has industry funding biased studies of the protective effects of alcohol on cardiovascular disease? A preliminary investigation of prospective cohort studies. Drug Alcohol Rev. 34(1):58–66.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCambridge J, Mialon M. 2018. Alcohol industry involvement in science: a systematic review of the perspectives of the alcohol research community. Drug Alcohol Rev. 37(5):565–579.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchell G, McCambridge J. 2021. Recruitment, risks, rewards and regrets: senior researcher reflections on working with alcohol industry social aspects organisations. Drug Alcohol Rev. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/dar.13342
   Google Scholar
• Mitchell G, Lesch M, McCambridge J. 2020. Alcohol industry involvement in the Moderate Alcohol and Cardiovascular Health Trial. Am J Public Health. 110(4):485–488.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pickering A. 1992. From science as knowledge to science as practice. In: Pickering A, editor. Science as practice and culture. Chicago (IL): Chicago University Press; p. 1–28.
   Google Scholar
• Rabin RC. 2018 March 17. Federal agency courted alcohol industry to fund study on benefits of moderate drinking. New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/17/health/nih-alcohol-study-liquor-industry.html
   Google Scholar
• Timmermans S, Tavory I. 2012. Theory construction in qualitative research: from grounded theory to abductive analysis. Sociol Theory. 30(3):167–186.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar