ArticlePublic understanding of science (Bristol, England)2020
Reconfiguring health knowledges? Contemporary modes of self-care as 'everyday fringe medicine'.
Article in Public understanding of science (Bristol, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Countering vaccine hesitancy: a systematic review of interventions to strengthen healthcare professionals' action.European journal of public health · 2023Pooled it
- Trust in healthcare and perceived discrimination in Sweden: a fixed effects analysis of individual heterogeneity and discriminatory accuracy.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Varieties of silence - a mixed-methods study exploring reasons and justifications for nondisclosure of the use of complementary therapies to physicians in Finland.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2024Article
- Recruiting a Hard-to-Reach, Hidden and Vulnerable Population: The Methodological and Practical Pitfalls of Researching Vaccine-Hesitant Parents.Qualitative health research · 2023Article
- [Coping with subjectively experienced coronavirus risks: perspectives of young, chronically ill adults].Pravention und Gesundheitsforderung · 2023Article
- On the verge between the scientific and the alternative: Swedish women's claims about systemic side effects of the copper intrauterine device.Public understanding of science (Bristol, England) · 2023Article
- Article
- Whose Advice is Credible? Claiming Lay Expertise in a Covid-19 Online Community.Qualitative sociology · 2022Article
- Attitudes Toward the Copper IUD in Sweden: A Survey Study.Frontiers in global women's health · 2022Article
- Attitudes Toward HPV Vaccination in Sweden: A Survey Study.Frontiers in public health · 2022Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The contestation of expertise is perhaps nowhere more pronounced than in the field of health and well-being, on which this article focuses. A multitude of practices and communities that stand in contentious relationships with established forms of medical expertise and promote personalised modes of self-care have proliferated across Euro-American societies. Drawing on multi-sited ethnography in three domains - body-mind-spirit therapies, vaccine hesitancy and consumer-grade digital self-tracking - we map such practices through the concept of 'everyday fringe medicine'. The concept of everyday fringe medicine enables us to bring together various critical health and well-being practices and to unravel the complex modes of contestation and appreciation of the medical establishment that are articulated within them. We find three critiques of the medical establishment - critiques of medical knowledge production, professional practices and the knowledge base - which make visible the complexities related to public understandings of science within everyday fringe medicine.
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.