ArticleBMJ open2021
Therapy-dependent inconsistencies in self-reported use of complementary and alternative medicine in the general population: findings from a longitudinal study.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Trends in the use of complementary and alternative medicine between 1987 and 2021 in Denmark.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveInformation on the use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in the general population is often collected by means of surveys, causing the reliability of data to rely on the memory accuracy of the respondent. The objective of this study was to examine the consistency in self-reported CAM use using data from two survey waves 4 years apart.
designLongitudinal study. SETTING/
participantsData were obtained from the Danish Health and Morbidity Surveys. A nationally representative subsample of the individuals invited in 2013 was reinvited in 2017. In all, 2297 individuals (≥16 years) completed the self-administered questionnaire in both waves, including questions on for example, CAM use.
main outcome measuresThe use of six different CAM therapies (acupuncture; craniosacral therapy; faith healing and/or clairvoyance; nutritional counselling; massage; osteopathy or other manipulative therapies; reflexology) was assessed by the response categories 'Yes, within the past 12 months', 'Yes, but previously than within the past 12 months' and 'No'. For each CAM therapy, an inconsistent response was defined as either the response combination (1) 'Yes, within the past 12 months' in 2013 and 'No' in 2017, or (2) 'Yes, within the past 12 months' or 'Yes, but previously than within the past 12 months' in 2013 and 'No' in 2017.
resultsThe inconsistency percentages varied across CAM therapies. The highest levels of inconsistency for CAM use within the past 12 months were observed for nutritional counselling (64.9 %) and faith healing and/or clairvoyance (36.4 %). The lowest proportion of inconsistent responses was observed for acupuncture (18.3%). Overall, the same pattern was observed for lifetime CAM use.
conclusionsThe results highlight the difficulty in obtaining reliable prevalence estimates on the use of CAM in the general population. Future studies should take these findings into account when interpreting similar analyses.
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.