Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32527256›Full record

ArticleBMC complementary medicine and therapies2020

Predictors of the use and approval of CAM: results from the German General Social Survey (ALLBUS).

Henrik Abheiden, Michael Teut, Anne Berghöfer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC complementary medicine and therapies, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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.

Henrik AbheidenInstitute for Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Luisenstraße 57, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Michael TeutInstitute for Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Luisenstraße 57, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
Anne BerghöferInstitute for Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Luisenstraße 57, 10117, Berlin, Germany. anne.berghoefer@charite.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7897-6500

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany studies have shown that sociodemographic variables significantly predict the use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), although these predictions were not particularly strong. A multitude of predictors of the use or approval of CAM have been investigated in the field of personal values and worldviews, but the effects were small or doubtful due to non-representative samples. More recent psychological research has linked positive attitudes towards CAM with intuitive thinking, paranormal beliefs, ontological confusions and magical health beliefs, suggesting a common thinking style behind all these variables. The aim of this study is to identify the most important predictors of the use and approval of CAM.

methodsWe performed a canonical correlation analysis on all 3480 records from the 2012 German General Social Survey (ALLBUS) with the lifetime use and opinion of CAM as the dependent variables.

resultsApproval of paranormal practices such as fortune-telling, dowsing or spiritualism explained 32% of the variance in the dependent canonical variate "approval of CAM", while sociodemographic variables explained only 2%. Experience with paranormal practices explained 17% of the variance in the dependent canonical variate "experience with CAM", and sociodemographic variables explained 10% of the variance. Traditional religiosity, attitudes towards science and post-materialist values showed no relevant correlations with the dependent canonical variates.

conclusionsParanormal beliefs and related measures are the most important known predictors of the use and approval of CAM. Experience with paranormal practices not only indicates paranormal beliefs but also explains experience with CAM that cannot be explained by approval of CAM. Female gender and higher socioeconomic status predict experience with CAM without predicting approval of CAM, but their influence should not be overstated.

Indexed as

CultureHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeComplementary TherapiesCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleGermanyHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesALLBUSAlternative medicineAttitudeComplementary medicineCross-sectional surveyEducationFemaleGermanyHealth care utilizationParanormal beliefs

Identifiers

PMID32527256
PMCPMC7291752

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.