Observational studyIntegrative cancer therapies2018
Do Women With Breast Cancer Who Choose Adjunctive Integrative Oncology Care Receive Different Standard Oncologic Treatment?
Observational study in Integrative cancer therapies, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Use of Integrative Oncology, Involvement in Decision-Making, and Breast Cancer Survivor Health-Related Quality of Life in the First 5 Years Postdiagnosis.Integrative cancer therapies · 2018Trial
- A Hierarchy of Healing: Origins of the Therapeutic Order and Implications for Research.Integrative medicine (Encinitas, Calif.) · 2019Article
- Effects of Vitamin D Use on Health-Related Quality of Life of Breast Cancer Patients in Early Survivorship.Integrative cancer therapiesArticle
- Does Adjunctive Naturopathic Care Decrease Survival Rates in Breast Cancer Patients?Integrative cancer therapiesArticle
- Recurrence of Breast Cancer After Primary Treatment: A Matched Comparison Study of Disease-Free Survival in Women Who Do and Do Not Receive Adjunctive Naturopathic Oncology Care.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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo determine if women with breast cancer who choose adjunctive naturopathic oncology (NO) specialty care receive different standard oncologic treatment when compared with breast cancer patients who receive only standard care.
participantsWomen with breast cancer stages 0 to 4, aged 18+ who spoke English and sought care from outpatient naturopathic doctor clinics were enrolled in an observational study of clinical and quality of life outcomes. Women who sought NO care 2 or more times within the first 2 years postdiagnosis were identified as NO cases. A matched comparison group of breast cancer patients were identified using the Western Washington Cancer Surveillance System(CSS).
methodsA longitudinal cohort design. In addition to self-report data, the CSS provided data on demographics, stage at the time of diagnosis, and initial treatment. Oncology medical records were abstracted in order to provide additional information on standard oncologic treatment for all participants.
resultsCohorts were well matched with regard to demographic, histologic, and prognostic indicators at the time of diagnosis. Approximately 70% of women in both cohorts received standard oncologic care that met the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. There were no statistically significant differences between the cohorts in treatment received. Fewer women in the NO cohort with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer appear to have received antiestrogen therapy.
conclusionsWomen in both cohorts appear to receive guideline-concordant care. However, women who receive adjunctive NO care may be less likely to receive antiestrogen therapy.
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.