ArticlePaediatrics & child health2018
Use and perceived effectiveness of complementary health approaches in children.
Article in Paediatrics & child health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of Jinzhen oral liquid and ambroxol hydrochloride and clenbuterol hydrochloride oral solution in the treatment of acute bronchitis in children: A multicenter, non-inferiority, prospective, randomized controlled trial.Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2024Trial
- Study of Complementary and Integrative Interventions in Pediatric Patients With Serious Illness.Journal of pain and symptom management · 2025Article
- Use of complementary and alternative medicine in patients with inborn errors of metabolism: A single-center study.JIMD reports · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesUp to one-half of children may use complementary health approaches (CHA). However, current prevalence in North America, variables associated with CHA use and caregiver perceptions of effectiveness are unclear. We aimed to determine the self-reported use of CHA during the previous 12 months in paediatric patients, demographic variables associated with CHA use and perceptions around effectiveness of CHA.
methodsA cross-sectional survey study of patients aged between 28 days and 18 years who presented to a large paediatric emergency department was conducted between December 2014 and July 2015. Univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression were used to examine variables associated with CHA use.
resultsOf 475 potential participants, 412 (86.7%) responded to the questionnaire, of whom 369 (89.5%) had completed the entire survey. Of these, 61.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 56.7% to 66.6%) reported using CHA for their child. The most used CHA products were vitamins and minerals (59.2%, 95% CI 52.4% to 65.7%). Among CHA practices, massage (50.0%, 95% CI 15.5% to 30.1%) was most common. Most CHA users perceived effectiveness of the therapy used. Parental education remained statistically significant (P=0.03) in multivariate logistic regression; the odds of CHA use among caregivers with university-level education were 1.65 times higher when compared with those without (95% CI 1.04% to 2.61%).
conclusionsCHA use is higher than previously reported in children. Given the high self-reported perceived effectiveness, paediatricians and family physicians should review CHA use with their patients in an open, non-judgmental manner, exploring both perceptions of safety and efficacy.
Indexed as
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.