Tobacco document research reporting
- Correspondence to: Stacy M Carter Room 129A Building A27, The University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia;
- Received 24 September 2004
- Accepted 26 May 2005
Objective: To understand the use of internal tobacco industry documents in the peer reviewed health literature.
Design: Interpretive analysis of published research.
Sample: 173 papers indexed in Medline between 1995 and 2004 that cited tobacco industry documents.
Analysis: Information about year published, journal and author, and a set of codes relating to methods reporting, were managed in N*Vivo. This coding formed the basis of an interpretation of tobacco document research reporting.
Results: Two types of papers were identified. The first used tobacco documents as the primary data source (A-papers). The second was dedicated to another purpose but cited a small number of documents (B-papers). In B-papers documents were used either to provide a specific example or to support an expansive contention. A-papers contained information about purpose, sources, searching, analysis, and limitations that differed by author and journal and over time. A-papers had no clear methodological context, but used words from three major traditions—interpretive research, positivist research, and history—to describe analysis.
Interpretation: A descriptive mainstream form of tobacco document reporting is proposed, initially typical but decreasing, and a continuum of positioning of the researcher, from conduit to constructor. Reporting practices, particularly from experienced researchers, appeared to evolve towards researcher as constructor, with later papers showing more complex purposes, diverse sources, and detail of searching and analysis. Tobacco document research could learn from existing research traditions: a model for planning and evaluating tobacco document research is presented.
- AJPH, American Journal of Public Health
- BAT, British American Tobacco
- DA, discourse analysis
- NTR, Nicotine and Tobacco Research
- TC, Tobacco Control
- TDR, tobacco document research
Sponsor details: this work was supported by an Australian Postgraduate Award.
Competing interests: none declared
Ethics approval: not required