Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35168630›Full record

ArticleBMC complementary medicine and therapies2022

Prevalence and predictive factors of complementary medicine use during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 in the Netherlands.

Louise T C Mulder, Martine Busch, Agnete E Kristoffersen, Johanna Hök Nordberg, Esther T van der Werf

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC complementary medicine and therapies, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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.

Louise T C MulderLouis Bolk Institute, Kosterijland 3-5, 3981 AJ, Bunnik, The Netherlands.
Martine BuschVan Praag Institute, Springweg 7, 3511 VH, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Agnete E KristoffersenNational Research Centre in Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NAFKAM), Department of Community Medicine, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
Johanna Hök NordbergRegional Cancer Centre Stockholm Gotland, Stockholm, Sweden.
Esther T van der WerfLouis Bolk Institute, Kosterijland 3-5, 3981 AJ, Bunnik, The Netherlands. info@louisbolk.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMajor life changing events such as the COVID-19 pandemic may have major impact on one's health and general well-being. This study aimed to determine the prevalence and predictive factors, including gender specific differences, of Complementary Medicine (CM) use (including CM consultations, self-care management and self-help techniques) during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 in the Netherlands.

methodsCM use was studied among a random representative sample (n = 1004) of the adult Dutch population using an online survey conducted from 22-27 May 2020. The survey included a modified version of I-CAM-Q and additional questions on demographic characteristics, reasons for CM use, perceived effectiveness and side effects.

results68.0% of the participants reported to have used CM (CM consultations (13.3%), self-management strategies (59.4%), self-help techniques (30.0%)). Most frequently reported reason of CM use was to improve general well-being (61.6%), prevention and/or treatment of COVID-19 was only reported by 10%. Perceived effectiveness of CM was high and number of experienced side effects low. Being a women, worried to get infected with COVID-19, higher education and living in northern/ middle region of the Netherlands were predictive factors to use CM.

conclusionsIn the Netherlands, specific groups (e.g. women/ highly educated) use CM, mainly to improve general wellbeing, and seem to benefit of it during the first months of the pandemic. The high perceived effectiveness and low reporting of side effects should encourage medical professionals and policy makers for more openness towards considering CM as being part of an integrative approach to public health in times life changing events occur.

Indexed as

Complementary TherapiesCOVID-19AdultFemaleHumansNetherlandsPandemicsPrevalenceSARS-CoV-2CM providerPrevalenceSelf-care techniquesSelf-management strategiesSurveyThe Netherlands

Identifiers

PMID35168630
PMCPMC8845358

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.