Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34951097›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2022

Demographics, health literacy and health locus of control beliefs of Australian women who take complementary medicine products during pregnancy and breastfeeding: A cross-sectional, online, national survey.

Larisa A J Barnes, Margaret I Rolfe, Lesley Barclay, Kirsten McCaffery, Parisa Aslani

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

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Larisa A J BarnesFaculty of Medicine and Health, School of Pharmacy and University Centre for Rural Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9847-775X
Margaret I RolfeFaculty of Medicine and Health, University Centre for Rural Health and School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Lismore, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-3041-1858
Lesley BarclayFaculty of Medicine and Health, University Centre for Rural Health and School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Lismore, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9345-3468
Kirsten McCafferyFaculty of Medicine and Health, School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2696-5006
Parisa AslaniFaculty of Medicine and Health, School of Pharmacy, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7976-8236
The University of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPregnant and breastfeeding women's use of complementary medicine products (CMPs) is common, and possibly associated with autonomous health care behaviours. However, the health literacy levels and health locus of control (HLOC) beliefs of women who use CMPs in pregnancy and lactation have not been previously assessed in a large Australian sample.

aimThe aim of this study is to determine the health literacy levels and HLOC beliefs of women who use CMPs in pregnancy and lactation and determine the types of CMPs used.

methodsA cross-sectional, national, online survey of Australian pregnant or breastfeeding women aged 18 years and older, and currently using CMPs was conducted.

resultsA total of 810 completed surveys (354 pregnant and 456 breastfeeding women) were analysed. Most had adequate functional health literacy levels (93.3%). Health care practitioners (HCPs) HLOC mean scores were the highest for the sample, followed by Internal HLOC beliefs mean scores. Almost all (n = 809) took at least one dietary supplement, the most popular being pregnancy and breastfeeding multivitamins, iron supplements and probiotics. Use was generally in line with clinical recommendations, except for low rates of iodine supplementation. Herbal medicine use was lower for the total sample (57.3%, n = 464), but significantly higher (p < .0001) for the breastfeeding cohort, with consumers taking one to four herbal medicines each. The most popular herbs were raspberry leaf, ginger, peppermint and chamomile (pregnant respondents) and chamomile, ginger and fenugreek (breastfeeding respondents).

conclusionsRespondents were health literate, with high scores for Internal and HCP HLOC scales, suggesting that they are likely to demonstrate self-efficacy, positive health behaviours and work well in partnership with HCPs. HCPs can facilitate discussions with pregnant and breastfeeding women using CMPs, while considering women's health literacy levels, health beliefs and goals.

Indexed as

Complementary TherapiesHealth LiteracyAdolescentAustraliaBreast FeedingCross-Sectional StudiesDemographyFemaleHumansInternal-External ControlPregnancybreast feedingcomplementary medicine productsdietary supplementshealth literacyhealth locus of controlherbal medicinepregnancy

Identifiers

PMID34951097
PMCPMC8957740
OpenAlexW4200121361

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.