Alcohol, Cardiovascular Disease, and Industry Influence: A Meta-review
Golder, S.; Lau, O.; Hartwell, G.; Blanchard, L.; Gibson, A.; Crookes, C.; Foster Davies, L.; Glover, R.
Show abstract
Objectives: This meta-review compares methodological and reporting approaches between systematic reviews examining alcohol dose and cardiovascular disease (CVD) and assesses whether alcohol industry involvement is associated with divergent conclusions. Methods: KSR Evidence was searched 6 May 2025 to update a cohort of 60 systematic reviews from previous review. Reviews were included if they examined any dose-response relationship between alcohol consumption and CVD. Two reviewers independently screened records and extracted data on review characteristics, and citations. Methodological quality was appraised using AMSTAR 2. For a matched sample of reviews with and without known alcohol industry funding, the overlap of included primary studies was compared using Corrected Covered Area (CCA) analysis. Results: Thirty additional systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria, yielding 90 systematic reviews (1996-2025). Most (60.0%, 54/90) concluded that alcohol had a cardioprotective effect, whereas 31.1% (28/90) concluded no evidence of protection, and 8.9% (8/90) were inconclusive. Twenty reviews (22.0%) had declared or inferred alcohol industry funding or author connection; all but one reported a protective effect at lower doses, the other was inconclusive. Industry-connected reviews were cited more often (mean 575.9 vs 193.0, p=0.0002) and more commonly examined overall CVD rather than specific conditions (such as hypertension or stroke). Study overlap was low (CCA 2.59%) and 99% of reviews were rated as critically low quality. Conclusions: The fragmented evidence base is of poor methodological quality with selective inclusion of studies. Alcohol industry connections are strongly associated, with conclusions favouring alcohol consumption, highlighting the need for independent high-quality systematic reviews.
Matching journals
The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Impact on alcohol selection and purchasing of increasing the proportion of non-alcoholic versus alcoholic drinks: randomised controlled trial 92%
- Accuracy and clinical effectiveness of risk prediction tools for pressure injury occurrence: An umbrella review 89%
- Mitigating the psychological impacts of COVID-19 restrictions: The B ehavioural A ctivation in S ocial I so l ation (BASIL) pilot randomised controlled trial to prevent depression and loneliness among older people with long term conditions 88%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Social media discourse and internet search queries on cannabis as a medicine: A systematic review 91%
- Individual Participant Data Network Meta-analysis of psychosocial interventions for survivors of intimate partner violence: Study protocol 91%
- Eating Disorders In weight-related Therapy (EDIT): Protocol for a systematic review with individual participant data meta-analysis of eating disorder risk in behavioural weight management 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Tool to assess risk of bias due to missing evidence in network meta-analysis (ROB-MEN): elaboration and examples 91%
- Circulating Metabolites May Illustrate Relationship of Alcohol Consumption with Cardiovascular Disease 90%
- Evidence of unexplained discrepancies between planned and conducted statistical analyses: a review of randomized trials 89%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.