Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31072149›Full record

ArticleIntegrative cancer therapies

Exploring the Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in Cancer Patients.

Ellen Jones, Lisa Nissen, Alexandra McCarthy, Kathryn Steadman, Carol Windsor

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Integrative cancer therapies. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  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

5 authors.

Ellen Jones1 Redcliffe Hospital, Redcliffe, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5521-8486
Lisa Nissen2 Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Alexandra McCarthy3 The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
Kathryn Steadman4 University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7357-330X
Carol Windsor2 Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In Australia, it is estimated that around 17% to 87% of cancer patients have used one form of complementary therapy during their cancer treatment. There are numerous reasons and contributing factors for cancer patients to consider using complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). CAM information and products are readily available. However, the level of evidence to support the benefits of use in the cancer setting is limited, and the associated adverse effects and interactions with conventional medicine may not be fully studied. Besides, not all health professionals favor the concept of integrative health approaches, or have the confidence in dealing with CAM due to a lack of knowledge and standardization of practices. A thematic review of the literature was performed on the main contributing factors to cancer patients' use of CAM, as well as the current issues that may be encountered by the patients and health professionals.

Indexed as

AustraliaComplementary TherapiesDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsHealth PersonnelHumansNeoplasmscancercomplementary and alternative medicinecontributing factorscultural-related factorsdisease-related factorsgender differencessocioeconomic factors

Identifiers

PMID31072149
PMCPMC7242794

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.