Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 424

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Association Between Use of Unconventional Therapies and Conventional Medical Services

Druss, Benjamin G.·1999·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: The terms alternative and complementary medicine suggest 2 contradictory possibilities. Whether individuals use unconventional therapies as a substitute for or as an "add on" to conventional medical treatments is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To determine the association between use of unconventional therapies and conventional medical care in a national sample. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The 1996 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey was distributed to a probability sample of the noninstitutionalized civilian US population. Of 24676 individuals responding (77.7% response rate), 16068 adults 18 years or older were included in the analysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Visits to practitioners for unconventional therapies and conventional medical services, including number of inpatient, outpatient, and emergency department visits and use of 8 types of preventive medical services (blood pressure, cholesterol level, physical examination, influenza vaccination, prostate examination, breast examination, mammography, and Papanicolaou test). RESULTS: During 1996, an estimated 6.5% of the US population had visits for both unconventional therapies and conventional medical care; 1.8% used only unconventional services; 59.5% used only conventional care; and 32.2% used neither. Compared with those with only conventional visits, those who used both types of care had significantly more outpatient physician visits (7.9 vs 5.4; P<.001), and used more of all types of preventive services except mammography. These groups did not differ significantly in inpatient care, prescription drug use, or number of emergency department visits. Individuals in the top quartile of number of physician visits were more than twice as likely as those in the bottom quartile to have used unconventional therapies in the past year (14.5% vs 6.4%; P<.001). The association between unconventional treatments and physician visits remained after adjusting for potential confounders and across different types of unconventional treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In this sample, use of unconventional therapies was substantially lower than has been reported in previous national surveys, but was associated with increased use of physician services. From a health services perspective, practitioner-based unconventional therapies appear to serve more as a complement than an alternative to conventional medicine.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.282.7.651

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 424

Metadata

Authors
Druss, B. G.
Venue
JAMA
Published
1999-08-18
Volume
282
Issue
7
Pages
651
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2120296380
Cited by
424
References
4
FWCI
58.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Association Between Use of Unconventional Therapies and Conventional Medical Services. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.282.7.651
The paper
Druss, B. G. (1999). Association Between Use of Unconventional Therapies and Conventional Medical Services. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.282.7.651

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.