ArticleEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2013
Perspectives on Medical Services Integration among Conventional Western, Traditional Korean, and Dual-Licensed Medical Doctors in Korea.
Article in Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Duagnosis: Locating Clinical Uncertainty in the Diagnostic Framework.Journal of evaluation in clinical practice · 2026Article
- Development of the Korean Medicine Core Outcome Set for Primary Dysmenorrhea (COS-PD-KM) for Herbal Medicine Treatment of Primary Dysmenorrhea in Primary Clinics.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Review
- A comparative study of the traditional medicine systems of South Korea and Taiwan: Focus on administration, education and license.Integrative medicine research · 2021Article
- Development of an adverse events reporting form for Korean folk medicine.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2017Article
- The past, present, and future of traditional medicine education in Korea.Integrative medicine research · 2016Review
- Clinical Experiences of Korean Medicine Treatment against Urinary Bladder Cancer in General Practice.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2016Article
- Factors Affecting Definitions of and Approaches to Integrative Medicine: A Mixed Methods Study Examining China's Integrative Medicine Development.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2015Article
- Intercultural Usage of Mori Folium: Comparison Review from a Korean Medical Perspective.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2015Review
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
The aim of this study was to examine the perspectives on the options for the integration of western and traditional Korean medical services among three types of medical doctors with different disciplines in Korea. We surveyed and analyzed responses from 167 conventional Western medicine (WM), 135 traditional Korean medicine (KM), and 103 dual-licensed (DL) doctors who can practice both. All three kinds of doctors shared similar attitude toward license unitarization. KM doctors most strongly agreed on the need of the cooperative practice (CP) between KM and WM and on the possibility of license unitarization among three groups. DL doctors believed that CP is currently impracticable and copractice is more efficient than CP. WM doctors presented the lowest agreement on the need of CP and showed lower expectation for DL doctors as mediators between WM and KM than others. This study showed the difference of perspectives on the options for the integrative medical services among three different doctor groups in Korea. More studies are required to explore the underlying reasons for these discrepancies among WM, KM, and DL doctors.
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.