Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33583417›Full record

ReviewBMC complementary medicine and therapies2021

Complementary and alternative medicine - practice, attitudes, and knowledge among healthcare professionals in New Zealand: an integrative review.

Lizhou Liu, Yong Tang, G David Baxter, Haiyan Yin, Steve Tumilty

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in BMC complementary medicine and therapies, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
11.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Lizhou LiuCentre for Health, Activity, and Rehabilitation Research, School of Physiotherapy, University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedin, 9054, New Zealand. lizhou.liu@otago.ac.nz.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8255-7544
Yong TangAcupuncture & Tuina School, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, China.
G David BaxterCentre for Health, Activity, and Rehabilitation Research, School of Physiotherapy, University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedin, 9054, New Zealand.
Haiyan YinAcupuncture & Tuina School, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, China.
Steve TumiltyCentre for Health, Activity, and Rehabilitation Research, School of Physiotherapy, University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedin, 9054, New Zealand.
University of Otago · NZChengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CN

Funding

Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine CZYHW1901New Zealand-China Non-Communicable Diseases Research Collaboration Centre N/AScience & Technology Department of Sichuan Province 2018HH0123University of Otago N/A
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe prevalence of CAM use is increasing. This integrative review investigated New Zealand healthcare professionals' practice of, attitudes toward, and knowledge about complementary and alternative medicine (CAM).

methodsLiterature search was conducted in four databases from inception to April 2020. Studies were included if they reported results from primary data collection on practice of, attitudes toward, or knowledge about CAM amongst New Zealand healthcare professionals.

resultsEleven studies (two of 'high-quality', seven of 'moderate-quality', and two of 'low-quality') were identified with 2060 healthcare professionals including general practitioners (GPs), nurses, midwives, pharmacists, physiotherapists, and medical specialists. New Zealand healthcare professionals were generally positive regarding CAM use, but have concerns on the scientific evidence, regulation, safety, financial costs of CAM, and encourage an evidence-based CAM practice and stronger CAM regulation. Findings indicated that around 25% of GPs practise CAM, and 82.3% refer patients to CAM practitioners. When treating pregnant women, 48.4% of physiotherapists practise acupuncture, and 37.3% of midwives recommend CAM. GPs believe that acupuncture is the most helpful CAM modality, and most commonly practiced and referred patients to acupuncture. Up to 58% of GPs and Plunket nurses wanted to receive further education on CAM, and up to 66.7% GPs favour the idea CAM should be included in medical curriculums.

conclusionsNine of the 11 included studies were of moderate to high quality, thus enhancing the reliability of the review findings. In order to better manage CAM in New Zealand New Zealand clinical settings, there is a need to invest in CAM research and education, and enhance CAM regulation. This review is a first step in developing an evidence base to offer insights for further development of effective CAM policies regarding safety, efficacy, regulation and integration in New Zealand.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeAdultComplementary TherapiesDelivery of Health CareFemaleHealth PersonnelHumansMaleMiddle AgedNew ZealandSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultAttitudesComplementary and alternative medicineHealthcare practitionersKnowledgeNew ZealandPractice

Identifiers

PMID33583417
PMCPMC7882070
OpenAlexW3132130449

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.