Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27776512›Full record

ArticleBMC complementary and alternative medicine2016

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) as part of primary health care in Germany-comparison of patients consulting general practitioners and CAM practitioners: a cross-sectional study.

Katja Krug, Katharina I Kraus, Kathrin Herrmann, Stefanie Joos

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC complementary and alternative medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Katja KrugDepartment of General Practice and Health Services Research, University Hospital Heidelberg, Marsilius-Arkaden, Turm West, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. katja.krug@med.uni-heidelberg.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9795-7954
Katharina I KrausDepartment of General Practice and Health Services Research, University Hospital Heidelberg, Marsilius-Arkaden, Turm West, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Kathrin HerrmannDepartment of General Practice and Health Services Research, University Hospital Heidelberg, Marsilius-Arkaden, Turm West, Im Neuenheimer Feld 130.3, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Stefanie JoosInstitute of General Practice and Interprofessional Care, University Hospital Tübingen, Österbergstr. 9, 72074, Tübingen, Germany.
Heidelberg University · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn Germany, complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in primary health care is offered by general practitioners (GPs) and by natural health practitioners, so called 'Heilpraktiker' (HPs). Considering the steadily growing number of unregulated HPs, the aim of the study was to assess characteristics of patients consulting HPs in comparison to patients consulting GPs.

methodsIn a cross-sectional study, patients of randomly selected GPs and HPs were asked to complete a questionnaire about their health care status, health care behavior, and symptoms rated on the Measure Yourself Medical Outcome Profile (MYMOP-D). Patient groups were compared based on health care provider (HP, GP with high use of CAM (CAM-GP), and GP with no/little use of CAM (nCAM-GP)) using Kruskal-Wallis tests and analyses of variance (ANOVA).

resultsAltogether, 567 patients (91 of 11 HPs, 223 of 15 CAM-GPs, 253 of 19 nCAM-GPs) filled in the questionnaire. Patients of HPs had a higher education level and were more often female. The most common reason for encounter among all three groups were musculoskeletal problems (30.2-31.1 %). Patients seeing HPs reported more psychological (4.4 % vs. 17.8 %), but less respiratory problems (19.9 % vs. 7.8 %), and longer symptom duration (>5 years: 21.1 % vs. 40.7 %), than patients of nCAM-GPs.

conclusionsThe high percentage of patients with psychological illness and chronic health problems consulting HPs demonstrates the urgent need for action with regard to CAM therapy in primary care and regulation of natural health practitioners. Appropriate measures with regard to quality and patient safety should be taken given the growing numbers of HPs and the absence of a regulatory body.

Indexed as

AdultAgedComplementary TherapiesCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleGeneral PractitionersGermanyHumansMaleMiddle AgedPractice Patterns, Physicians'Primary Health CareReferral and ConsultationComplementary medicineGeneral practicePatient characteristicsPrimary health careReasons for encounter

Identifiers

PMID27776512
PMCPMC5078911
OpenAlexW2534349062

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.