Coding framework for classifying evidence
| Evidential criteria | Use in previous studies | Data coding framework | Coding categories | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Relevance | Subject matter | What is the topic, argument, position or conclusion of the evidence?40–42 | What issue does the research address? | ▸ Standardised packaging of tobacco ▸ Tobacco packaging, eg, graphic health warnings ▸ Tobacco, not packaging ▸ Unrelated to tobacco |
| Quality | Independence | Who funded the evidence? Are authors affiliated to the tobacco industry?39–42 | Who funded the research? Has the author of the research any connection with the tobacco industry? | ▸ Tobacco industry-funded (statement included that the research was funded by the tobacco industry) ▸ Tobacco industry-linked (no statement that the research was funded by the tobacco industry, but evidence of other connection: eg, author or funder have prior links to the tobacco industry) ▸ Independent of the tobacco industry (statement included that the research was funded by a source independent of the tobacco industry) ▸ No apparent tobacco industry connection (no information provided about funding source and no evidence of prior connection with the tobacco industry) |
| Peer-review status | Has the evidence been peer-reviewed? What is the impact factor of the journal and date of publication?39–42 | Was the research published in peer-reviewed journal? If not, where was the research published? | ▸ Peer-reviewed journal ▸ Academic press volume ▸ Conference paper ▸ Government-commissioned research ▸ University research report ▸ Government internal research ▸ Charity research report ▸ Private company research report ▸ Unpublished |