Alternative medicine research in clinical practice a US national survey

30Citations
Citations of this article
49Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Little is known about whether federally funded complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) research is translating into clinical practice. We sought to describe the awareness of CAM clinical trials, the ability to interpret research results, the acceptance of research evidence, and the predictors of trial awareness among US clinicians. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional mailed survey of 2400 practicing US acupuncturists, naturopaths, internists, and rheumatologists. Results: A total of 1561 clinicians (65%) responded. Of the respondents, 59% were aware of at least 1 major CAM clinical trial; only 23% were aware of both trials. A minority of acupuncturists (20%), naturopaths (25%), internists (17%), and rheumatologists (33%) were "very confident" in interpreting research results (P < .001). Twice as many internists (53%) and rheumatologists (64%) rated patient preferences as "least important" compared with acupuncturists (27%) and naturopaths (31%) (P

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Tilburt, J. C., Curlin, F. A., Kaptchuk, T. J., Clarridge, B., Bolcic-Jankovic, D., Emanuel, E. J., & Miller, F. G. (2009). Alternative medicine research in clinical practice a US national survey. Archives of Internal Medicine, 169(7), 670–677. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinternmed.2009.49

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free