Alcohol, cardiovascular disease and industry funding: A co-authorship network analysis of epidemiological studies.

• Small doses of alcohol may or may not benefit cardiovascular disease (CVD). • Alcohol industry actors have been involved in review-level evidence, generating concerns. • Industry funding is not a major determinant of co-authorship in alcohol and CVD. • Conflicting findings on alcohol and CVD may be due to industry funding bias. • Progress in this area has implications for alcohol public health science and policy. Alcohol's effects on cardiovascular disease (CVD) are controversial. Alcohol industry actors have shown particular interest in this subject, and been extensively involved through research funding, and in other ways, generating concerns about bias, particularly in reviews. We conducted a co-authorship network analysis of the primary studies included within a previous co-authorship study of 60 systematic reviews on the impact of alcohol on CVD. Additionally, we examined the relationships between declared alcohol industry funding and network structure. There were 713 unique primary studies with 2832 authors published between 1969 and 2019 located within 229 co-authorship subnetworks. There was industry funding across subnetworks and approximately 8% of all papers declared industry funding. The largest subnetwork dominated, comprising 43% of all authors, with sparse evidence of substantial industry funding. The second largest subnetwork contained approximately 4% of all authors, with largely different industry funders involved. Harvard affiliated authors who at the review level formed co-authorship subnetworks with industry funded authors were seen at the primary study level to belong to the largest epidemiological subnetwork. A small number of key authors make extensive alcohol industry funding declarations. There was no straightforward relationship between co-authorship network formation and alcohol industry funding of epidemiological studies on alcohol and CVD. More fine-grained attention to patterns of alcohol industry funding and to key nodes may shed further light on how far industry funding may be responsible for conflicting findings on alcohol and CVD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]