ArticlePloS one2023
Rates, patterns, and predictors of complementary medicine use among patients with musculoskeletal diseases.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Knowledge attitude and practice of older adults rheumatoid arthritis patients regarding disease management in a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Prevalence of Complementary and Alternative Medicine Use in Fracture Patients: a Tertiary Trauma Center Observation.Journal of epidemiology and global health · 2025Observational
- Article
- Glucocorticoid use and perceptions of side effects among patients with rheumatic medical diseases: Insights from a developing country.PloS one · 2025Article
- Prevalence, patterns, drivers, and perceived benefits of herbal medicine use in COVID-19 patients in Qatar.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo investigate the extent of complementary medicine (CM) use and the most common therapies utilized by Jordanian patients with musculoskeletal (MSK) diseases.
methodsA semi-structured questionnaire was used to conduct a cross-sectional survey of outpatient orthopedic and rheumatology patients at an academic medical center in Amman, Jordan between January and September 2020.
resultsA convenience sample of 1001 patients was interviewed (82% females). Pearson's chi-square comparisons showed that nutritional CM was used by 43.4% of patients, while 29.8% used physical CM, and 16% used both. Almost all used the nutritional or physical CM in addition to their prescribed treatment. Nutritional form use was significantly higher among females, older age groups, married people, and those who worked (p < .05). Physical form use was statistically more prevalent in older age groups and those with a higher level of education (p < .05). Family income and urban residence were not significantly associated with the use of either form of CM therapy. Olive oil was the most frequently reported nutritional type (22.9%), and cupping was the most reported physical type (41.6%). Recommendations to use CM came primarily from family members or friends (64% of nutritional CM users and 59% of physical CM users). A physician or pharmacist was cited more frequently with physical CM (24% versus 8% for the nutritional form). In contrast, media sources were cited more for nutritional than physical form (28% versus 7%). Over half of the patients believed they received the desired effect from CM. Surprisingly, only 9.5% of the patients admitted to discussing their CM use with their physician.
conclusionCM use is prevalent among Jordanian patients with MSK disorders. Most patients rely on family and friends for recommendations, and they rarely inform their physician of the CM use. Physicians should routinely inquire about CM to provide patients with information regarding their benefits and risks.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.