Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30866916›Full record

ArticleBMC complementary and alternative medicine2019

Cancer patients' use of complementary and alternative medicine in Sweden: a cross-sectional study.

Kathrin Wode, Roger Henriksson, Lena Sharp, Anna Stoltenberg, Johanna Hök Nordberg

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC complementary and alternative medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 93 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
93citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

93 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Online cancer forums and complementary and alternative medicine in cancer care: effects of ehealth literacy and psychological distress on use and attitudes.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Article

33 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors.

Kathrin WodeRegional Cancer Center Stockholm Gotland, Box 6909, 102 39, Stockholm, Sweden. kathrin.wode@sll.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6449-6349
Roger HenrikssonRegional Cancer Center Stockholm Gotland, Box 6909, 102 39, Stockholm, Sweden.
Lena SharpRegional Cancer Center Stockholm Gotland, Box 6909, 102 39, Stockholm, Sweden.
Anna StoltenbergRegional Cancer Center Stockholm Gotland, Box 6909, 102 39, Stockholm, Sweden.
Johanna Hök NordbergRegional Cancer Center Stockholm Gotland, Box 6909, 102 39, Stockholm, Sweden.

Funding

Regional Cancer Center Stockholm Gotland Grant 2013
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccess to and advice on Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) are uncommon within Swedish conventional cancer care and little is known about cancer patients' own use of CAM. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to explore Swedish cancer patients´ patterns of CAM use, their experiences and preferences.

methodsQuestionnaires were distributed consecutively to 1297 cancer patients at a university hospital's out-patient oncology units. The response rate was 58% (n = 755). Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the survey data. A logistic regression model was used to investigate the association between CAM use and gender, age and level of education. Open-ended responses were analyzed, using qualitative content analysis.

resultsLifetime CAM use was reported by 34% (n = 256), and 26% (n = 198) used CAM after cancer diagnosis. Being female, younger and having higher education predicted CAM use. Most commonly used methods were natural products including vitamins and minerals and relaxation. Main reasons for CAM use were improvement of physical, general and emotional wellbeing and increasing the body's ability to fight cancer. Satisfaction with CAM usage was generally high. Reported adverse effects were few and mild; 54% of users spent < 50 Euro a month on CAM. One third had discussed their CAM use with cancer care providers. More than half of all participants thought that cancer care providers should be able to discuss (58%) and to consider (54%) use of CAM modalities in cancer care.

conclusionsDespite limited access and advice within conventional cancer care, one fourth of Swedish cancer patients use CAM. The insufficient patient-provider dialogue diverges with most patients' wish for professional guidance in their decisions and integration of CAM modalities in conventional cancer care. Concurrent and multimodal CAM use implies challenges and possibilities for cancer care that need to be considered.

Indexed as

Complementary TherapiesAdultAgedCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsOncology Service, HospitalSurveys and QuestionnairesSwedenAdultCancerComplementary and alternative medicine/utilizationCross-sectional studiesEpidemiologyEuropeEvidence-based medicineIntegrative oncologyOncologySweden

Identifiers

PMID30866916
PMCPMC6417272

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.