Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23897081›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Clinical oncology2013

Complementary or alternative medicine in cancer care-myths and realities.

Gary Deng, Barrie Cassileth

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Clinical oncology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. The Anticancer Effect of Natural Plant Alkaloid Isoquinolines.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Evidence appraisal: a scoping review, conceptual framework, and research agenda.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2017
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Gary DengIntegrative Medicine Service, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1429 First Avenue, New York, NY 10021, USA.
Barrie Cassileth
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Complementary therapies are adjuncts to mainstream care, used primarily for symptom control and to enhance physical and emotional strength during and after mainstream cancer treatment. These therapies are rational, noninvasive and evidence-based that have been subjected to study to determine their value, document the problems they aim to ameliorate and define the circumstances under which they are beneficial. By contrast, 'alternative' therapies are generally promoted as such-for use as actual antitumour treatments. Typically they lack biological plausibility and scientific evidence of safety and efficacy, and many are outright fraudulent. Combining the helpful complementary therapies with mainstream oncology care to address patients' physical, psychological and spiritual needs constitutes the practice of integrative oncology. By providing patients' nonpharmacological treatment modalities that reduce symptom burden and improve quality of life, physicians enable patients to have an active role in their care, which in turn improves the physician-patient relationship, the quality of cancer care and the well-being of patients and their families.

Indexed as

Complementary TherapiesPatient Care TeamQuality of Health CareHumansIntegrative MedicineNeoplasms

Identifiers

PMID23897081
OpenAlexW2020026524

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.