ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2016
Complementary therapy use in metropolitan and regional Australian radiotherapy centres; do patients report effective outcomes?
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrative oncology and complementary medicine cancer services in Australia: findings from a national cross-sectional survey.BMC complementary and alternative medicine · 2018Article
- Complementary and alternative medicine use in patients before and after a cancer diagnosis.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2018Article
- Australian integrative oncology services: a mixed-method study exploring the views of cancer survivors.BMC complementary and alternative medicine · 2018Article
- Integrative Oncology: International Perspectives.Integrative cancer therapiesArticle
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
purposeComplementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is increasingly used with radiotherapy treatment for cancer. This study aimed to explore patient expectations of concurrent CAM, positive/negative outcomes and any variation of use across regional and metropolitan demographics.
methodsAn ethics-approved survey was provided to radiotherapy outpatients in regional and metropolitan Victoria, Australia. The survey enquired about demographical details, CAM uptake, perceived benefits/effects, source of CAM information and disclosure of use.
resultsTwo hundred sixty-five patients were recruited across both sites. Patients reporting concurrent CAM use were 45 % (regional site, April-August 2012) and 47 % (metropolitan site, January-May 2013). More patients at the regional centre reported living away from home during treatment (35 vs 8 %) though this did not impact upon CAM uptake. For both sites, 60 % of CAM users felt they had been provided with sufficient CAM information with family/friends the most common source. The highest reported rationale for CAM use was the patient's choice (61 and 52 %). Only 19 % of patients at either site claimed the recommendation of a doctor was the reason for CAM use. 'Improving immune system' was the most common expectation of CAM at both sites (39 and 50 %). More than half of CAM users felt that it was effective (51 and 54 %).
conclusionsCAM use across regional and metropolitan Australia is equivalent, constitutes a substantial proportion of radiotherapy outpatients and is largely considered effective by CAM users. Healthcare professionals need to improve knowledge, communication, reporting and awareness of concurrent CAM in radiotherapy practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26446700What 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.