Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36057614›Full record

ArticleBMC complementary medicine and therapies2022

Safety and use of complementary and alternative medicine in Norway during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic using an adapted version of the I-CAM-Q; a cross-sectional survey.

Agnete Egilsdatter Kristoffersen, Miek C Jong, Johanna Hök Nordberg, Esther T van der Werf, Trine Stub

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 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Long COVID and Physical Therapy: A Systematic Review.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
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.

Agnete Egilsdatter KristoffersenNational Research Center in Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NAFKAM), Department of Community Medicine, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway. agnete.kristoffersen@uit.no.
Miek C JongNational Research Center in Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NAFKAM), Department of Community Medicine, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.
Johanna Hök NordbergRegional Cancer Center Stockholm Gotland, Stockholm, Sweden.
Esther T van der WerfLouis Bolk Institute, Bunnik, the Netherlands.
Trine StubNational Research Center in Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NAFKAM), Department of Community Medicine, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic lockdown has had a profound impact on physical and mental well-being throughout the world. Previous studies have revealed that complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is frequently used for, and can be potential beneficial for strengthening physical mental resilience. The aims of this study were therefore to determine the prevalence and reasons for use of CAM during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic among a representative sample of the Norwegian population, and further determine self-reported effects and adverse effects of the CAM modalities used.

methodsComputer assisted telephone interviews using a COVID-adapted I-CAM-Q questionnaire were conducted with 1008 randomly selected Norwegians aged 16 and above using multistage sampling during April and May 2020 applying age and sex quotas for each area. Frequencies, Pearson's chi-square tests, Fisher exact tests, and independent sample t-test were used to identify the users of CAM, what they used, why they used it and whether they experienced effect and/or adverse effects of the modalities used, and further to describe differences in sociodemographic factors associated with CAM use. Cronbach's alpha tests were used to test for internal consistency in the different groups of CAM. Significance level was set to p < 0.05.

resultsThe study revealed that two thirds of the respondents (67%) had used CAM within the first 3 months of the COVID-19 pandemic, in particular CAM modalities that did not involve a provider. Most used were natural remedies and dietary supplement (57%, mainly vitamins and minerals), but self-help practices like yoga and meditation were also widely used (24%). Women used CAM modalities significantly more than men (77% vs. 58%). Most of the respondents found the modalities they used beneficial, and few reported adverse effects of the treatments.

conclusionsA large proportion of the Norwegian population used CAM during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic with high satisfaction and few reported adverse effects. CAM was rarely used to prevent or treat COVID-19, but rather to treat a long-term health condition, and to improve well-being.

Indexed as

Complementary TherapiesCOVID-19Communicable Disease ControlCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleNorwayPandemicsCAMComplementary therapiesCOVID-19NorwaySafetyT&CM

Identifiers

PMID36057614
PMCPMC9440323

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.