Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37172048›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Utilization of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) by women with breast cancer or gynecological cancer.

Anja Stöcker, Anja Mehnert-Theuerkauf, Andreas Hinz, Jochen Ernst

Expression of concernAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It carries an expression of concern. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Polyphenol-enriched fraction ofFrontiers in pharmacology · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Oncology researchers' and clinicians' perceptions of complementary, alternative, and integrative medicine: an international, cross-sectional survey.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Anja StöckerDepartment of Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, University Medical Center Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Anja Mehnert-TheuerkaufDepartment of Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, University Medical Center Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Andreas HinzDepartment of Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, University Medical Center Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Jochen ErnstDepartment of Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, University Medical Center Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2374-3232

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundComplementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) has become increasingly popular among cancer patients. The prevalence of CAM use differs worldwide and depends on different sociodemographic and medical characteristics. Findings on predictors for CAM use and its benefits for quality of Life (QoL) have been inconclusive in recent studies.

objectiveThe aim of the study was to determine the prevalence and methods of CAM use in breast cancer (BC) and gynecological cancer (GC) patients, to compare CAM users vs. non-CAM users regarding their sociodemographic and medical characteristics, and to investigate the relationship between CAM use and QoL.

methodsIn a sub-analysis from a multicenter, cross-sectional study in Germany, we examined 1,214 female cancer patients (897 with BC and 317 with GC). We obtained data from self-reports via standardized questionnaires and measured QoL with the EORTC QLQ-C30.

resultsIn total, 565 of the 1,214 patients (46.5%) used some form of CAM. Its use was higher in BC than in GC patients (48.6% vs. 40.7%). In both cancer groups, the users evaluated CAM as being helpful (BC: 60.8%, GC: 59.6%) The most frequently used CAM methods were vitamins/minerals/micronutrients, homeopathy, and mistletoe therapy. CAM users are younger, more highly educated, and financially better off than non-CAM users. They are also characterized by having been diagnosed with cancer a longer time ago, being at more advanced stages of the disease, and experiencing higher distress levels. CAM use is significantly associated with a lower global health status/ QoL in GC patients. Predictors for CAM use are: high level of vocational education, middle or high monthly income, time span since diagnosis of more than 12 months, the status of currently ongoing chemotherapy or hormone therapy treatment, and distress.

conclusionOur data support the findings of previous studies and highlight the need to develop a consistent CAM definition with respect to comparability and evaluation of CAM services. More longitudinal studies are desirable to establish viable associations between CAM use and relevant outcomes such as QoL or disease management.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsComplementary TherapiesCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealth StatusHumansQuality of LifeSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID37172048
PMCPMC10180689

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.