Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27707901›Full record

ArticleJournal of evidence-based complementary & alternative medicine2017

Complementary and Alternative Medicine Use in Modern Obstetrics: A Survey of the Central Association of Obstetricians & Gynecologists Members.

Shilpa Babbar, Karen B Williams, Dev Maulik

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of evidence-based complementary & alternative medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

3 authors.

Shilpa Babbar1 Saint Louis University, Saint Louis, MO, USA.
Karen B Williams2 University of Missouri, Kansas City, MO, USA.
Dev Maulik2 University of Missouri, Kansas City, MO, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of complementary and alternative medicine during pregnancy is currently on the rise. A validated survey was conducted at the Central Association of Obstetrician and Gynecologists annual meeting to evaluate the knowledge, attitude, and practice of general obstetricians and gynecologists and maternal-fetal medicine specialists in America. We obtained 128 responses: 73 electronically (57%) and 55 via the paper survey (43%). Forty-five percent reported personally using complementary and alternative medicine and 9% of women respondents used complementary and alternative medicine during pregnancy. Overall, 62% had advised their patients to utilize some form of complementary and alternative medicine in pregnancy. Biofeedback, massage therapy, meditation, and yoga were considered the most effective modalities in pregnancy (median [semi-interquartile range] = 2 [0.5]). Maternal-fetal medicine specialists were significantly more likely to disagree on the use of complementary and alternative medicine for risk reduction of preterm birth compared to obstetricians and gynecologists ( P = .03). As the use of complementary and alternative medicine continues to rise in reproductive-age women, obstetricians will play an integral role in incorporating complementary and alternative medicine use with conventional medicine.

Indexed as

Complementary TherapiesObstetricsFemaleGynecologyHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMalePregnancycomplementary and alternative medicineobstetricspregnancy

Identifiers

PMID27707901
PMCPMC5871154

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.