ReviewHealth SA = SA Gesondheid2024
The use of traditional and complementary medicine by cancer patients in SSA: A scoping review.
Review in Health SA = SA Gesondheid, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Traditional Medicinal Plants Used for Cancer Treatment in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Systematic Review.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Diagnosis, care pathways, and Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) use among digestive cancer patients in Benin: a qualitative study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The rate of traditional and complementary medicine (T&CM) use is increasing worldwide, including among cancer patients who are often willing to try alternate therapies. Despite T&CM popularity in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), there are limited data on its use with conventional treatments. Aim: This scoping review aims to describe the prevalence of use, reasons for use, most common types of T&CM used, patient satisfaction with T&CM and disclosure of T&CM use to physicians among cancer patients in SSA. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted for articles published from 2013 to 2022 across four databases: PubMed, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar and EBSCOhost. A scoping review approach was used to map relevant literature. Forty-six articles were assessed based on their titles and abstracts. After full-text screening, 10 articles were included. Results: Average T&CM use was calculated to be 66.7%. Reasons for T&CM use included: to improve psychological well-being, boost the body's immunity and provide symptomatic relief. An average of 21.2% of T&CM users informed their physician. Nine articles addressed patient satisfaction with T&CM. An average of 39.1% of patients reported general T&CM satisfaction. Conclusion: The use of T&CM is common among cancer patients. It is important for healthcare providers to expand their knowledge in order to counsel patients and avoid potential hazards when combining T&CM with conventional treatments. Contribution: These findings highlight commonly used T&CM and provide insight on the portion of cancer patients informing their doctors about T&CM use. This information will help understand the attitude cancer patients have towards T&CM.
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.