Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 23, 2025

Integrating Computerized Linguistic and Social Network Analyses to Capture Addiction Recovery Capital in an Online Community
Published on: May 31, 2019
Influence of Disclosed and Undisclosed Funding Sources in Tobacco Harm Reduction Discourse: A Social Network Analysis
Julia Vassey1, Yogi H Hendlin2, Manali Vora3
1Department of Population and Public Health Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Introduction:
Tobacco harm reduction (THR) discourse has been divisive for the tobacco control community, partially because it sometimes aligns public health and tobacco industry interests. Industry funding is contentious as it influences study outcomes, and is not always disclosed in scientific publications. This study examines the role of disclosed and undisclosed industry support on THR publications via social network analysis.
Methods:
We reviewed 826 English-language manuscripts (1992-2016) to determine disclosed and undisclosed industry (pharmaceutical, tobacco, and e-cigarette) and non-industry (including government) support received by 1405 authors. We used social network analysis to identify the most influential authors in THR discourse by assessing the number of their collaborators on publications, the frequency of connecting other authors in the network, and tendency to form groups based on the presence of sponsorship disclosures, sources of funding, and THR stance.
Results:
About 284 (20%) out of 1405 authors were supported by industry. Industry-sponsored authors were more central and influential in the network: with twice as many publications (Median = 4), 1.25 as many collaborators on publications (Median = 5), and higher likelihood of connecting other authors and thus having more influence in the network, compared to non-industry-sponsored authors. E-cigarette industry-sponsored authors had the strongest association with undisclosed industry support.
Conclusions:
Authors with industry support exerted a stronger influence on the THR scientific discourse than non-industry-supported authors. Journals should continue adhering to strict policies requiring conflicts of interest disclosures. An increase in public health spending on tobacco control research may be necessary to achieve funding parity.
More Related Videos
09:50Impact Assessment of Repeated Exposure of Organotypic 3D Bronchial and Nasal Tissue Culture Models to Whole Cigarette Smoke
Published on: February 12, 2015
06:39Electroencephalographic, Heart Rate, and Galvanic Skin Response Assessment for an Advertising Perception Study: Application to Antismoking Public Service Announcements
Published on: August 28, 2017
Related Concept Videos
Relationship Formation
Drug Control Governance: Regulatory Bodies and Their Impact
Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
Bias in Epidemiological Studies
Statistical Methods for Analyzing Epidemiological Data
Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - II