Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15082809›Full record

ReviewJournal of medical ethics2004

Ethical problems arising in evidence based complementary and alternative medicine.

E Ernst, M H Cohen, J Stone

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of medical ethics, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

29 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Neck pain clinical practice guidelines: a systematic review of the quality and quantity of complementary and alternative medicine recommendations.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2022
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Neuroenhancement for sale: assessing the website claims of neurofeedback providers in the United States.Journal of cognitive enhancement : towards the integration of theory and practice · 2020
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

E ErnstComplementary Medicine, Peninsula Medical School, Universities of Exeter and Plymouth, Exeter, UK. Edzard.Ernst@pms.ac.uk
M H Cohen
J Stone

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Complementary and alternative medicine has become an important section of healthcare. Its high level of acceptance among the general population represents a challenge to healthcare professionals of all disciplines and raises a host of ethical issues. This article is an attempt to explore some of the more obvious or practical ethical aspects of complementary and alternative medicine.

Indexed as

Attitude to HealthBiomedical ResearchComplementary TherapiesCultureEthics, ResearchEvidence-Based MedicineFinancing, OrganizedHolistic HealthHumansLicensure, MedicalPhilosophy, MedicalPrivate PracticeUnited KingdomHealth Care and Public Health

Identifiers

PMID15082809
PMCPMC1733834

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.