Why Patients Use Alternative Medicine: Results of a National Study
Abstract
Context Research both in the United States and abroad suggests that significant numbers of people are involved with various forms of alternative medicine. However, the reasons for such use are, at present, poorly understood. Objective To investigate possible predictors of alternative health care use. Methods Three primary hypotheses were tested. People seek out these alternatives because (1) they are dissatisfied in some way with conventional treatment; (2) they see alternative treatments as offering more personal autonomy and control over health care decisions; and (3) the alternatives are seen as more compatible with the patients' values, worldview, or beliefs regarding the nature and meaning of health and illness. Additional predictor variables explored included demographics and health status. Design A written survey examining use of alternative health care, health status, values, and attitudes toward conventional medicine. Multiple logistic regression analyses were used in an effort to identify predictors of alternative health care use. Setting and participants A total of 1035 individuals randomly selected from a panel who had agreed to participate in mail surveys and who live throughout the United States. Main outcome measure Use of alternative medicine within the previous year. Results The response rate was 69%. The following variables emerged as predictors of alternative health care use: more education (odds ratio [OR], 1.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-1.3); poor…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Depression is a well-recognised reason for seeking alternative therapies.
“Depression is a well-recognised reason for seeking alternative therapies (Astin 1998).”
From Exercise for depression (2009) · cites this paper as Astin 1998
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 37 · Cited by 2,865
- Authors
- Astin, J. A.
- Affiliations
- Stanford Medicine (US)
- Corresponding author
- Astin, John A.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 1998-05-20
- Volume
- 279
- Issue
- 19
- Pages
- 1548
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2084693379
- Cited by
- 2,865
- References
- 37
- Citations by year
- 2026: 27 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 43 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 67 · 2021: 53 · 2020: 65 · 2019: 53 · 2018: 49 · 2017: 59 · 2016: 78 · 2015: 110 · 2014: 113 · 2013: 129 · 2012: 117
- FWCI
- 265.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- JAMA (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Complementary and Alternative Medicine Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Traditional Chinese Medicine Studies
- Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
- Keywords
- alternative medicine use, transformative experience, health status, anxiety, chronic pain, back problems, cultural values, environmentalism, feminism, spirituality, educational attainment
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Aged, Complementary Therapies, Attitude to Health, Data Collection, Female, Health Status, Holistic Health, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Philosophy, Medical, Social Values, Socioeconomic Factors, United States, Multivariate Analysis, Logistic Models, Personal Autonomy
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review