Developing a Self-Report Outcome Measure for Complementary and Alternative Medicine

EXPLORE ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 177-185 ◽  
Author(s):  
David T. Eton ◽  
Karen Koffler ◽  
David Cella ◽  
Amy Eisenstein ◽  
John A. Astin ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 1949 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chiara Baglioni ◽  
Zarina Bostanova ◽  
Valeria Bacaro ◽  
Fee Benz ◽  
Elisabeth Hertenstein ◽  
...  

Insomnia is a prevalent disorder and it leads to relevant impairment in health-related quality of life. Recent clinical guidelines pointed out that Cognitive-Behavior Therapy for Insomnia (CBT-I) should be considered as first-line intervention. Nevertheless, many other interventions are commonly used by patients or have been proposed as effective for insomnia. These include melatonin, light exposure, exercise, and complementary and alternative medicine. Evaluation of comparable effectiveness of these interventions with first-line intervention for insomnia is however still lacking. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis on the effects of these interventions. PubMed, PsycInfo, PsycArticles, MEDLINE, and CINAHL were systematically searched and 40 studies were included in the systematic review, while 36 were entered into the meta-analysis. Eight network meta-analyses were conducted. Findings support effectiveness of melatonin in improving sleep-onset difficulties and of meditative movement therapies for self-report sleep efficiency and severity of the insomnia disorder. Some support was observed for exercise, hypnotherapy, and transcranial magnetic resonance, but the number of studies for these interventions is still too small. None of the considered interventions received superior evidence to CBT-I, which should be more widely disseminated in primary care.


2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 346
Author(s):  
Sarah M Hilkert ◽  
Naz Askari ◽  
Jan D Hirsch ◽  
Shira L Robbins

Objectives:   Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) has become increasingly common in pediatrics.  While previous studies have evaluated pediatric CAM use across various subspecialties, estimates regarding pediatric CAM use in ophthalmology are lacking. This study explores CAM use among pediatric ophthalmology patients in a pediatric ophthalmology practice.Methods:  609 self-report questionnaires were distributed to parents whose children were seen at the University of California, San Diego / Ratner Children’s Eye Center between July 2009 and January 2010.  The survey included questions regarding demographic information of the parent, eye condition of the child, and CAM use by the child. The two main outcomes were CAM use in the past and preference for CAM use in the future. Results:  126 surveys were included in the final analysis.  Overall, 11% of parents reported previous CAM use for their child’s eye condition, and 44% of parents indicated a preference for CAM use for their child’s eye condition, depending on the side effects.  Logistic regression revealed that past CAM use was not associated with the parent’s race, gender, or level of education.  However, CAM preference was negatively associated with the parent’s level of education (p = 0.045). Discussion:   As with other pediatric subspecialties, treatment of children with CAM is common in pediatric ophthalmology.  Given the significant number of parents who reported using CAM and/or a preference for CAM, our results emphasize the need for all pharmacists, ophthalmologists, and pediatricians to discuss CAM use with patients and their families. 


2019 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. e239-e248
Author(s):  
Vladimíra Čavojová ◽  
Selin Ersoy

Abstract Background While previous research has shown that trust in complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is linked with other unfounded beliefs (e.g. paranormal phenomena or pharmaceutical conspiracies) and that analytic thinking can help alter these beliefs, the role of the ability to evaluate evidence as a protective factor has not been established yet. Methods A cross-sectional design with a hundred participants was used with self-report data from questionnaires and performance test. The dependent variables were the belief in CAM and use of CAM. Predictor variables were scientific reasoning (measured by Scientific Reasoning Scale), critical thinking dispositions (measured by Critical Thinking Disposition Instrument; UF-EMI), religious beliefs (measured by Santa Clara Strength of Religious Faith Questionnaire), gender and age. Results Scientific reasoning and religious faith independently predicted belief in alternative medicine, while the role of scientific reasoning in actual reported use of CAM diminished after religious faith, gender and age were introduced to the model. Conclusion The results highlight the fact that it is not enough to appeal to the general critical thinking of people, but we need to teach them some practical skills that would help them to evaluate evidence in other, health-unrelated, contexts as well.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document