ArticleJournal of global oncology2018
Prevalence of Complementary Medicine Use in Patients With Cancer: A Turkish Comprehensive Cancer Center Experience.
Article in Journal of global oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessment tools for the risk of pressure injury in children: A systematic review.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2025Review
- Article
- Oncology researchers' and clinicians' perceptions of complementary, alternative, and integrative medicine: an international, cross-sectional survey.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Article
- The Inhibitory Effect of KerraMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Article
- Enablers and barriers to evidence implementation in complementary medicine: A systematic review.Integrative medicine research · 2022Review
- The Self-Administered Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) Supplements and Antioxidants in Cancer Therapy and the Critical Role of Nrf-2-A Systematic Review.Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Prevalence of the Use of Herbal Medicines among Patients with Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2021Review
- Trends in the utilization of acupuncture among children in Taiwan from 2002 to 2011: a nationwide population-based study.BMC complementary and alternative medicine · 2019Article
- Complementary and Integrative Medicine Use in Individuals Seeking Conventional Medical Oncology Care in Chile: Prevalence and Patient Characteristics.Journal of global oncology · 2019Article
- Exploring the Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in Cancer Patients.Integrative cancer therapiesArticle
- Exploring the Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in Cancer Patients.Integrative cancer therapiesReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeComplementary and alternative medicine (CAM) has been popular among patients with cancer for several decades. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the prevalence of CAM use and to identify the factors affecting CAM use in a large patient cohort seen at a comprehensive cancer center in Turkey. PATIENTS AND
methodsAn investigator-designed survey was completed by volunteer patients who visited the outpatient clinic in the medical oncology department. CAM use encompassed pharmacologic agents including vitamins, dietary supplements, and herbal products or nonpharmacologic methods like prayer, meditation, hypnosis, massage, or acupuncture.
resultsOf 1,499 patients who answered the survey, 1,433 (96%) used nonpharmacologic CAM and 60 (4%) used pharmacologic CAM (pCAM). The most frequent types of CAM used were prayer (n = 1,433) followed by herbal products (n = 42). pCAM use was not significantly associated with age ( P = .63), sex ( P = .15), diagnosis ( P = .15), or income level ( P = .09). However, it was significantly associated with the level of education ( P = .0067) and employment status ( P < .001). Patients with higher education levels used more pCAM products ( P = .025). Among 60 pCAM users, six patients (10%) used pCAM for more than 2 years and 22 (36%) did not consult their physicians about their pCAM use. Only nine patients (15%) reported unpleasant adverse effects related to pCAM.
conclusionAlthough CAM use was high among our patients, prevalence of pCAM use was lower than expected. Patients with higher education levels tended to use more pCAM.
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.