CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 23Complementary and Alternative Medicine StudiesMedical Research and TreatmentsPhytochemistry Medicinal Plant Applications

Use of complementary and alternative medicine by Brazilian oncologists

SAMANO, E.S.T., RIBEIRO, L.M., CAMPOS, A.S., LEWIN, F., FILHO, E.S.V., GOLDENSTEIN, P.T., COSTA, L.J.M., DEL GIGLIO, A.·2005·European Journal of Cancer Care
DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2354.2005.00524.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is frequently employed by patients with cancer. An extensive survey was conducted among Brazilian cancer physicians to understand their attitude towards CAM. A questionnaire was sent to all 655 members of the Brazilian Cancer Society asking what is their opinion regarding CAM and if they would prescribe any CAM modality for their patients. They were also questioned regarding their degree of awareness of CAM self-administration by their patients. Overall, 119 questionnaires were returned to us (18%). Most oncologists knew at least one type of CAM (96.6%) and 76.7% had previously made use of at least one type of CAM for themselves. We observed that 76 (63.8%) of the oncologists used to ask their patients about CAM utilization and 37.8% described at least one reason to stimulate its use (68.8% as complementary treatment). Only 10% of the oncologists would prescribe at least one type of CAM and this attitude correlated significantly with previous physicians' use of CAM and with being a clinical oncologist as well as with having questioned patients about CAM use. Most oncologists (80.7%) would not indicate the use of CAM, mainly for lack of scientific proof of its efficacy (56.2%). Physicians knew many kinds of CAM and had frequently used some of them themselves, but only a minority of Brazilian oncologists would indicate them. As CAM use is very prevalent in our population, we believe that most of its utilization depends, probably, on patient's own and independent initiatives. However, these results should be viewed with caution because of the low response rate we observed in this study.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1365-2354.2005.00524.x

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
SAMANO, E. S. T., RIBEIRO, L. M., CAMPOS, A. S., LEWIN, F., FILHO, E. S. V., GOLDENSTEIN, P. T., COSTA, L. J. M., & DEL GIGLIO, A.
Affiliations
Universidade de São Paulo (BR)
ORCID
Venue
European Journal of Cancer Care
Publisher
Hindawi Limited
Published
2005-05
Volume
14
Issue
2
Pages
143-148
ISSN
  • 0961-5423 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2354
DOI
10.1111/j.1365-2354.2005.00524.x
OpenAlex
W1981285441
Cited by
23
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2013: 2
FWCI
4.05
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1 (tdm, 3775 d)
Locations
  • European Journal of Cancer Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Complementary and Alternative Medicine Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Medical Research and Treatments
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Phytochemistry Medicinal Plant Applications
Keywords
complementary and alternative medicine, oncologists, physician attitudes, cancer patients
MeSH terms
Complementary Therapies, Attitude of Health Personnel, Brazil, Female, Humans, Male, Medical Oncology, Middle Aged, Neoplasms, Surveys and Questionnaires

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