ArticleEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2012
Complementary or alternative? Patterns of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use among Finnish children.
Article in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patterns of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use in children: a systematic review.European journal of pediatrics · 2014Pooled it
- Complementary and alternative medicine use among pediatrics in Palestine: a cross-sectional study.BMC pediatrics · 2021Article
- Use of alternative-complementary-medicine (CAM) in Calabrian children.Italian journal of pediatrics · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to measure patterns of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use among Finnish children and to explore whether CAM use among children is mainly complementary or alternative.
methodsWe carried out a cross-sectional population-based survey in spring 2007. The study population consisted of a representative sample (n = 6,000) of Finnish children under 12 years of age. A questionnaire was sent to their parents, and 4,032 questionnaires were returned (response rate 67 %). Pearson's chi-square test and logistic regression analysis were conducted to measure factors associated with CAM use.
resultsThe prevalence of CAM use among children was 11 %. Fish oils and fatty acids (6 %) followed by probiotics (4 %) were the most commonly reported CAMs used. Being the first born, using vitamins and having at least one symptom predicted the use of CAMs. Parental use of vitamins and CAMs were also associated with CAM use among children. In the preceding 2 days, 3 % of children in the study had used only CAMs, and 7 % had used a CAM concomitantly with prescribed and/or over-the-counter medicines.
conclusionsOur results indicate that the use of CAMs among Finnish children is mainly for improving health and alleviating symptoms, especially in families where at least one parent also uses these modalities. CAMs were mainly used as complementary rather than as an alternative to conventional care. Healthcare professionals should be aware of this complementary use of CAMs and medicines in patients to avoid risks of potential interactions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.