Trial reportPloS one2018
Social determinants affecting the use of complementary and alternative medicine in Japan: An analysis using the conceptual framework of social determinants of health.
Trial report in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of complementary and alternative medicine use during pregnancy in Iran.BMJ open · 2026Pooled it
- The association between health anxiety and visits to traditional and complementary medicine providers in Norway: the Tromsø7 Study.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2025Article
- Use of Complementary and Integrative Medicine Among Low-Income Persons With Mental Health Disorders.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2025Article
- Data Ownership in the AI-Powered Integrative Health Care Landscape.JMIR medical informatics · 2024Article
- Article
- Complementary and Alternative Medicine Attitudes of Gynecologic Patients: Experience in a Tertiary Clinic.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2021Article
- Exploring socioeconomic inequalities in the use of medicinal herbs among Iranian households: evidence from a national cross-sectional survey.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2020Article
- Prevalence, expenditures, and associated factors of purchasing non-prescribed Chinese herbal medicine in Taiwan.PloS one · 2020Article
- The impact of uncertainty in society on the use of traditional, complementary and alternative medicine: a comparative study on visits to alternative/traditional/folk health care practitioners.BMC complementary and alternative medicine · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aims to use the conceptual framework of social determinants of health (SDH) to elucidate the social determinants that affect the use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) from the perspectives of both intermediary and structural determinants. Data were derived from a survey mailed to 1,500 randomly selected residents (20-69 years old; May-July 2009) of Sendai city in Japan. A generalized linear model was used in the analysis, with CAM use over the past one month as the dependent variable, SDH structural and intermediary determinants as independent variables, and demographic characteristics, indicators of health status, and the evaluation of health or healthcare systems as control variables. The prevalence of CAM usage was 62.1%. The generalized linear model showed that middle subjective social status (OR = 1.47; 95% CI: 1.04-2.07) as structural determinants was significantly associated with CAM usage. Adding the intermediary determinants, the same effect was observed. When demographic characteristics, indicators of health status, and the evaluation of health or healthcare systems were introduced as control variables, the associations of the structural determinants disappeared, revealing that hope (OR = 1.25; 95%CI: 1.04-1.50) as intermediary determinants was associated with the use of CAM. Female sex (OR = 1.47; 95% CI: 1.02-2.12) and health anxiety (OR = 1.68; 95% CI: 1.20-2.34) were associated with CAM usage. We found that intermediary rather than structural determinants were associated with CAM usage. Hope as an intermediary determinant was particularly associated with CAM usage.
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.