Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30228928›Full record

ReviewScientifica2018

A Descriptive Review of the Prevalence and Usage of Traditional and Complementary Medicine among Saudi Diabetic Patients.

Saud Alsanad, Tamer Aboushanab, Mohammed Khalil, Osama A Alkhamees

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Scientifica, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Effect ofCurrent drug metabolism · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Saud AlsanadNational Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, Ministry of Health, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Tamer AboushanabNational Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, Ministry of Health, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-4184-0431
Mohammed KhalilNational Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, Ministry of Health, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Osama A AlkhameesCollege of Medicine, Al Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud Islamic University (IMSIU), Al-Nada, Riyadh 13317-4233, Saudi Arabia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Diabetes mellitus represents a major burden in Saudi Arabia where seven million (20% of population) are living with diabetes. This article reviews the literature on usage of traditional and complementary medicine (T&CM) therapies among Saudi diabetic patients, focusing in particular on identifying the prevalence as well as discussing their safety and efficacy. Three databases (PubMed, Cochrane, and ScienceDirect) were searched prior to December 10, 2017, for articles published in peer-reviewed journals that reported primary data on the use of traditional and complementary medicine therapies among diabetic patients in Saudi Arabia. Six studies were selected according to the inclusion/exclusion criteria. In conclusion, the prevalence of use of T&CM therapies among diabetics in Saudi Arabia was 32.18%. This review identified that the most used T&CM therapy among diabetics was herbal treatment. The most used herbs were fenugreek, black seeds, neem, myrrh, helteet, harmel, and aloes. There is insufficient or little evidence to support the efficacy of the most identified herbs and therapies. This review is raising the safety concerns about the used herbs and complementary therapies which were commonly used without any medical consultation.

Identifiers

PMID30228928
PMCPMC6136479

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.