Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30894151›Full record

ReviewBMC complementary and alternative medicine2019

A critical integrative review of complementary medicine education research: key issues and empirical gaps.

Alastair C Gray, Amie Steel, Jon Adams

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. COVID-19 and Massage Therapy Education Impact and Future Implications.International journal of therapeutic massage & bodywork · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  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

3 authors at 1 institution in 3 countries.

Alastair C GrayPhD Candidate Australian Research Centre in Complementary and Integrative Medicine (ARCCIM), Faculty of Health, University of Technology Ultimo, Sydney, NSW, Australia. Alastair.Gray@endeavour.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4520-4560
Amie SteelSenior Research Fellow Australian Research Centre in Complementary and Integrative Medicine Faculty of Health University of Technology, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Jon AdamsDistinguished Professor of Public Health, ARC Professorial Future Fellow and Director of the Australian Research Centre in Complementary and Integrative Medicine (ARCCIM), Faculty of Health, University of Technology Ultimo, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
University of Technology Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundComplementary Medicine (CM) continues to thrive across many countries. Closely related to the continuing popularity of CM has been an increased number of enrolments at CM education institutions across the public and private tertiary sectors. Despite the popularity of CM across the globe and growth in CM education/education providers, to date, there has been no critical review of peer-reviewed research examining CM education undertaken. In direct response to this important gap, this paper reports the first critical review of contemporary literature examining CM education research.

methodsA review was undertaken of research to identify empirical research papers reporting on CM education published between 2005 and 17. The search was conducted in May 2017 and included the search of PubMed and EBSCO (CINAHL, MEDLINE, AMED) for search terms embracing CM and education. Identified studies were evaluated using the STROBE, SRQP and MMAT appraisal tools.

resultsFrom 9496 identified papers, 18 met the review inclusion criteria (English language, original empirical research data, reporting on the prevalence or nature of the education of CM practitioners), and highlighted four broad issues: CM education provision; the development of educational competencies to develop clinical skills and standards; the application of new educational theory, methods and technology in CM; and future challenges facing CM education. This critical integrative review highlights two key issues of interest and significance for CM educational institutions, CM regulators and researchers, and points to number of significant gaps in this area of research. There is very sporadic coverage of research in CM education. The clear absence of the robust and mature research regarding educational technology and e-learning taking place in medical and or allied health education research is notably absent within CM educational research.

conclusionDespite the high levels of CM use in the community, and the thriving nature of CM educational institutions globally, the current evidence evaluating the procedures, effectiveness and outcomes of CM education remains limited on a number of fronts. There is an urgent need to establish a strategic research agenda around this important aspect of health care education with the overarching goal to ensure a well-educated and effective health care workforce.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceComplementary TherapiesHumansModels, EducationalAndragogyChallengesComplementary medicineEducationEducation researchE-learningLearning technologiesNaturopathy

Identifiers

PMID30894151
PMCPMC6427897
OpenAlexW2922550236

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.