ArticleGlobalization and health2026
Commercial practices of the arms industry and implications for global public health: a scoping review.
Article in Globalization and health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Commercial practices of the arms industry and implications for global public health: a scoping review.Globalization and health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe arms industry and the global trade in weapons pose significant direct and indirect risks to population health and equity. While health-harming industries such as tobacco, alcohol, and ultra-processed foods have been extensively examined with a commercial determinants of health lens, the commercial strategies of the arms industry remain critically underexplored in public health research. To address this gap, we conducted a scoping review of peer-reviewed literature published between 2004 and 2024. Searches were undertaken across four academic databases (Web of Science, Scopus, ABI/INFORM, and Business Source Complete) and Google Scholar. Data were extracted and analysed using deductive and inductive coding, guided by a previously published typology of commercial practices: financial, political, scientific, marketing, supply chain and waste, labour and employment, and reputational management practices.
resultsForty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. Marketing and political practices were the most frequently reported, while supply chain and waste, financial, labour and employment, reputational management, and scientific practices were less common. Our review found that the arms industry not only engages in commercial practices identified within established commercial determinants of health frameworks but also employs additional strategies, such as bribery and corruption, worker surveillance, contesting worker illness claims, and a number of supply chain practices that extend beyond existing typologies. The majority of studies focused on firearms-related practices, particularly within the United States, while few addressed other arms industry sub-sectors such as major conventional weapons and nuclear weapons, and little attention was given to low- and middle-income countries.
conclusionDespite the scale and influence of the arms industry, its commercial sector practices remain largely overlooked in public health research. Greater scrutiny and recognition of the arms industry as a commercial determinant of health is essential to mitigate the health harms and inequities associated with the global production, proliferation, and use of weapons.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.