Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39902362›Full record

ReviewIranian journal of public health2025

Quality Assessment of Cohort Studies in Complementary and Alternative Medicine: A Scoping Review Over Two Decades.

Mojtaba Norouzi, Ali Akbar Haghdoost

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Iranian journal of public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Mojtaba NorouziDepartment of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Faculty of Public Health, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran.
Ali Akbar HaghdoostHIV/STI Surveillance Research Center, and WHO Collaborating Center for HIV Surveillance, Institute for Futures Studies in Health, Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: We aimed to investigate the subject matters and the quality of publications detailing the findings of cohort studies within the realm of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). Methods: A scoping review was conducted on cohort studies in the CAM field up to the conclusion of 2023. The evaluation of their quality was carried out utilizing the 'Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology' (STROBE) checklist. Moreover, an analysis of their research settings and associated variables, including publication year, type of disease, intervention method, and study field, was conducted. Results: Overall, 215 articles were identified. The majority of these cohorts, approximately 42.3%, originated from Taiwan, with stroke and cardiovascular diseases emerging as the most prevalent outcomes of interest. The mean STROBE score was 1.38 (SD=0.57) out of 2. The lowest scores were associated with the methods and funding sections. Methodologically, the principal weaknesses were linked to sample size, loss to follow-up, and bias control. Conclusion: The frequency of cohort studies in CAM was limited, predominantly concentrated in a few countries. Chinese medicine and acupuncture were the main intervention methods, while other CAM interventions received less focus. Furthermore, the quality of these studies was deemed unsatisfactory in most cases.

Indexed as

Cohort studiesComplementary therapiesQuality assessmentScoping review

Identifiers

PMID39902362
PMCPMC11787836

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.