ArticleMedicine2020
Knowledge and use of complementary therapies in a tertiary care hospital in France: A preliminary study.
Article in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Auriculotherapy and acupuncture treatments for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: a multicenter clinical trial.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Trial
- Relationship among symptoms, quality of life, and complementary and alternative medicines use among patients undergoing hemodialysis in French-speaking Switzerland.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2023Article
- Homeopathy as Praxis: Integration of Homeopathy as Supportive Care into Daily Life in Early Breast Cancer Patients.Integrative cancer therapiesArticle
- A Survey on the Prescribing Orientation Towards Complementary Therapies Among Oncologists in Italy: Symptoms and Unmet Patient Needs.In vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Few studies have clarified the use of complementary therapies (CTs) in France. The main objective of this preliminary study was to evaluate knowledge of CTs in 4 representative groups of patients: patients suffering from cancer, patients presenting with a chronic noncancerous disease, chronic dialysis patients and nonchronic or cancerous patients needing surgery.A formalized questionnaire was designed by 2 psychologists, an oncologist and an anesthesiologist in charge of the Pain Clinic and Support Care Unit. One-hundred eleven patients were enrolled, and all agreed to complete the questionnaire.Eighty (72%) patients did not know the term "complementary therapies" (patients who were "not aware of CTs"), and 24 (21.6%) patients knew the term "complementary therapies" (patients who were "aware of CTs"), while 7 patients were not sure of the meaning. There were no differences between aware and unaware patients in gender (P = .27), age (P = .24), level of education (p = 0.24) or professional occupation (P = .06). Knowledge about CTs was significantly different among the different categories of patients (P = .03), with the only statistically significant difference between groups being between oncologic patients receiving ambulatory chemotherapy and patients presenting with a chronic noncancerous disease (P = .004).This preliminary study clearly highlights that patients and health caregivers are not aware of CTs and that there is a need for better communication about CTs.
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.