Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22933591›Full record

SynthesisThe oncologist2012

Cancer patient disclosure and patient-doctor communication of complementary and alternative medicine use: a systematic review.

Esther L Davis, Byeongsang Oh, Phyllis N Butow, Barbara A Mullan, Stephen Clarke

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The oncologist, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 153 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
153citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
41.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

153 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 340 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. An education on pharmacologically active complementary and alternative medicine and its effects on cancer treatment: literature review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2022
    Pooled it
  6. Guideline
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Integrative oncology consultation and patient referral to complementary therapies: results from the prospective study THERAC.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Observational
  13. Stakeholder priorities for advancing integrative oncology across a pluralistic health system: a qualitative study from Singapore.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Diagnosis, care pathways, and Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) use among digestive cancer patients in Benin: a qualitative study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  16. Cannabis stigma and symptom management considerations in cancer survivors: a mixed-methods exploration of patient perspectives.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Observational
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

93 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Esther L DavisCentre for Medical Psychology and Evidence-Based Decision-Making, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. esther.davis@sydney.edu.au
Byeongsang Oh
Phyllis N Butow
Barbara A Mullan
Stephen Clarke
University of Sydney · AUHarvard University · USRoyal North Shore Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo explore the nondisclosure of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use among cancer patients, including reasons for and outcomes from nondisclosure of CAM use, within the context of patient-doctor communication.

methodA systematic review was conducted exploring investigations surrounding the communication of CAM use for patients with cancer published until August 2011.

resultsA total of 21 studies were located, which reported a prevalence of CAM use among patients with cancer ranging between 11% and 95%; of these patients, 20% to 77% did not disclose their CAM use. The main reasons for nondisclosure were the doctor's lack of inquiry; patient's anticipation of the doctor's disapproval, disinterest, or inability to help; and patient's perception that disclosure of CAM use is irrelevant to their conventional care. There is some evidence to suggest that patient-doctor communication about the use of CAM was associated with an enhanced patient-doctor relationship and higher patient satisfaction.

conclusionsAlthough the use of CAM by patients with cancer is high, patients frequently fail to disclose its use to their health professionals for reasons emanating from both sides of the dyadic patient-doctor relationship. Because a substantial proportion of patients with cancer may use CAM and there is potential for herb- or vitamin-drug interactions, further research in patient-doctor communication about CAM is necessary to maintain patient safety and wellbeing. The development of effective interventions to improve the disclosure of CAM use should be an integral part of this future research.

Indexed as

Complementary TherapiesDisclosurePhysician-Patient RelationsAttitude of Health PersonnelCommunicationHumansNeoplasmsPatient SatisfactionPractice Patterns, Physicians'

Identifiers

PMID22933591
PMCPMC3500370
OpenAlexW2147496620

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.