ArticleBMC complementary medicine and therapies2025
Use of complementary medicines among older adults living in 23 residential aged care facilities in Australia.
Article in BMC complementary medicine and therapies, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is limited information on complementary medicine (CM) use among older adults living in residential aged care facilities (RACFs). This study aimed to determine the prevalence and predictors of CM use and to examine differences in CM use by facility for residents of RACFs.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective study using routinely collected electronic data about permanent residents aged ≥ 65 years in December 2021 from 23 RACFs in Sydney. The prevalence of CM product use was estimated, and modelling was used to determine factors associated with CM use. Funnel plots visualised differences in prevalence of CM use between facilities.
resultsA total of 1,873 residents were included in the analysis with 78.4% (95% CI: 76.5-80.3) using at least one CM product and 41.2% (95% CI: 39-43.4) using 2 or more CMs. The most frequently used CM products were vitamin D (61.4%), magnesium (18.0%) and calcium (13.1%). Certain diagnoses were associated with both the likelihood of using a CM as well as the number of CMs used. For example, individuals with fractures were more likely to use ≥ 2 CMs (OR 1.29; 95% CI 1.05-1.58), as were those with an endocrine disorder. Residents with circulatory conditions and dementia were less likely to use ≥ 2 CMs. The prevalence of residents using at least one CMs ranged from 54 to 88% between facilities.
conclusionsThe prevalence of CM use is high in RACFs. Research to investigate the appropriateness of CM use to ensure their safe and effective use in RACFs is needed.
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.