Carter S M
The University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.
Tob Control. 2005 Dec;14(6):368-76. doi: 10.1136/tc.2004.010132.
To understand the use of internal tobacco industry documents in the peer reviewed health literature.
Interpretive analysis of published research.
173 papers indexed in Medline between 1995 and 2004 that cited tobacco industry documents.
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.
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.
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.
了解同行评审的健康文献中烟草行业内部文件的使用情况。
对已发表研究进行解释性分析。
1995年至2004年间被Medline索引的173篇引用烟草行业文件的论文。
有关发表年份、期刊和作者的信息，以及一组与方法报告相关的代码，在N*Vivo中进行管理。这种编码构成了对烟草文件研究报告进行解释的基础。
识别出两种类型的论文。第一种将烟草文件用作主要数据源（A类论文）。第二种致力于其他目的，但引用了少量文件（B类论文）。在B类论文中，文件要么用于提供具体例子，要么用于支持宽泛的论点。A类论文包含的关于目的、来源、检索、分析和局限性的信息因作者、期刊以及时间的不同而有所差异。A类论文没有明确的方法学背景，但使用了来自三种主要传统——解释性研究、实证主义研究和历史研究——的词汇来描述分析。
提出了一种描述性的烟草文件报告主流形式，最初具有代表性但呈减少趋势，以及研究人员角色定位的一个连续体，从信息传递者到构建者。报告实践，尤其是经验丰富的研究人员的实践，似乎朝着研究人员作为构建者的方向发展，后期的论文显示出更复杂的目的、多样的来源以及检索和分析的细节。烟草文件研究可以借鉴现有的研究传统：提出了一个规划和评估烟草文件研究的模型。
