ArticleEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2018
Themes Underlying Australian General Practitioner Views towards Chiropractic and Osteopathy: An Assessment of Free Text Data from a Cross-Sectional Survey.
Article in Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Attitudes and perceptions of health care professionals concerning chiropractors and chiropractic practice: a systematic review.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2026Pooled it
- Fluid professional boundaries: ethnographic observations of co-located chiropractors, osteopaths and physiotherapists.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Service utilisation trends in the manual therapy professions within the Australian private healthcare setting between 2008 and 2017.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2020Article
- An investigation of Australian osteopaths' attitudes, skills and utilisation of evidence-based practice: a national cross-sectional survey.BMC health services research · 2019Article
- An observational study on trajectories and outcomes of chronic low back pain patients referred from a spine surgery division for chiropractic treatment.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2019Observational
- A perspective on Chiropractic Councils on Education accreditation standards and processes from the inside: a narrative description of expert opinion: Part 1: Themes.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Australian chiropractic and osteopathic professions underwent a period of significant transformation between 1960 and 2000. This resulted in an improvement in the views held by the medical profession towards the two professions. However, a recent survey of Australian general practitioners (GPs) reported that a number of GPs still hold negative views towards chiropractors and osteopaths. This paper examines these views from the perspective of critical realism and explores the generative mechanisms that can influence the willingness of health practitioners to collaborate over patient care. A qualitative analysis of open-ended responses to a survey of 630 Australian GPs was conducted. Unfavourable attitudes of GPs towards chiropractors and osteopaths included perceived lack of safety, efficacy, and inadequacy of training, despite chiropractic's and osteopathy's reliance on the same evidence base and similar training to those of other manual therapy professions such as physiotherapy. These attitudes may be underpinned by the professional biases against chiropractic and osteopathy that continue to marginalise the professions within the Australian healthcare system. Continued investment in the research base for chiropractic and osteopathic practice is required, along with raising the awareness of GPs about the education and skills of chiropractors and osteopaths.
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.