The ethics of complementary medicine.

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.

1. Additional treatment with mistletoe extracts for patients with breast cancer compared to conventional cancer therapy alone - efficacy and safety, costs and cost-effectiveness, patients and social aspects, and ethical assessment.German medical science : GMS e-journal · 2022
   Review
2. Nature, nurture, or nuisance: The ethical issues that surround alternative medicine.International journal of women's dermatology · 2017
   Article
3. Ethics of complementary medicine: practical issues.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2009
   Article
4. Ethical problems arising in evidence based complementary and alternative medicine.Journal of medical ethics · 2004
   Review
5. [Use of unconventional therapies by cancer patients].Sozial- und Praventivmedizin · 1999
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

1 author.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as