Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35413882›Full record

ArticleBMC complementary medicine and therapies2022

Operational definition of complementary, alternative, and integrative medicine derived from a systematic search.

Jeremy Y Ng, Tushar Dhawan, Ekaterina Dogadova, Zhala Taghi-Zada, Alexandra Vacca, L Susan Wieland, David Moher

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
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 51 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 5 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

51 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

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

7 authors.

Jeremy Y NgDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada. ngjy2@mcmaster.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0031-5873
Tushar DhawanDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Ekaterina DogadovaDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Zhala Taghi-ZadaDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Alexandra VaccaDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
L Susan WielandCenter for Integrative Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
David MoherCentre for Journalology, Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada.

Funding

Cochrane Complementary Medicine Field: Resource for ResearchR24AT001293 · NCCIH · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE · PI BERMAN, BRIAN M, WIELAND, LISA SUSAN · 2003 to 2022
$9.4M
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIdentifying what therapies constitute complementary, alternative, and/or integrative medicine (CAIM) is complex for a multitude of reasons. An operational definition is dynamic, and changes based on both historical time period and geographical location whereby many jurisdictions may integrate or consider their traditional system(s) of medicine as conventional care. To date, only one operational definition of "complementary and alternative medicine" has been proposed, by Cochrane researchers in 2011. This definition is not only over a decade old but also did not use systematic methods to compile the therapies. Furthermore, it did not capture the concept "integrative medicine", which is an increasingly popular aspect of the use of complementary therapies in practice. An updated operational definition reflective of CAIM is warranted given the rapidly increasing body of CAIM research literature published each year.

methodsFour peer-reviewed or otherwise quality-assessed information resource types were used to inform the development of the operational definition: peer-reviewed articles resulting from searches across seven academic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Scopus and Web of Science); the "aims and scope" webpages of peer-reviewed CAIM journals; CAIM entries found in online encyclopedias, and highly-ranked websites identified through searches of CAIM-related terms on HONcode. Screening of eligible resources, and data extraction of CAIM therapies across them, were each conducted independently and in duplicate. CAIM therapies across eligible sources were deduplicated.

resultsA total of 101 eligible resources were identified: peer-reviewed articles (n = 19), journal "aims and scope" webpages (n = 22), encyclopedia entries (n = 11), and HONcode-searched websites (n = 49). Six hundred four unique CAIM terms were included in this operational definition.

conclusionsThis updated operational definition is the first to be informed by systematic methods, and could support the harmonization of CAIM-related research through the provision of a standard of classification, as well as support improved collaboration between different research groups.

Indexed as

Complementary TherapiesIntegrative MedicineBibliometricsResearch DesignComplementary and alternative medicineIntegrative medicineOperational definitionStandard of classification

Identifiers

PMID35413882
PMCPMC9006507

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.