CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 83Complementary and Alternative Medicine StudiesTraditional Chinese Medicine StudiesMedical Research and Treatments

Differences between Male and Female Consumers of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in a National US Population: A Secondary Analysis of 2012 NIHS Data

Open access
Zhang, Yan, Leach, Matthew J., Hall, Helen, Sundberg, Tobias, Ward, Lesley, Sibbritt, David, Adams, Jon·2015·Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine
DOI 10.1155/2015/413173PMC PMC4377351
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

We examined the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) 2012 to explore how US adult consumers of CAM differ by gender in terms of their sociodemographic characteristics, current health conditions, and perceived benefits of CAM. All individuals who completed the adults core interviews (N= 34,525) were included. CAM use, major sociodemographic variables, perceived benefits of using CAM, and top ten reported health conditions for which CAM was used were selected and analyzed by Stata. Findings revealed that 29.6% (n= 10,181) reported having used at least one form of CAM in the previous 12 months. Compared to male CAM users, female CAM users were more likely to have a bachelor degree, to be divorced/separated or widowed, and less likely to earn $75,000 or more. Back pain/problem was the most common problem reported by both male and female CAM users (32.2% and 22.6%, resp.). A higher proportion of female CAM users reported using CAM for perceived benefits such as general wellness or general disease prevention. This paper provides foundation information regarding gender differences in CAM use and is a platform for further in-depth examination into how and why males and females differ in their reasons for CAM use.

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 · 10.1155/2015/413173

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Analysis of the 2012 NHIS data finds that users of complementary and alternative medicine are 73% female (OR = 2.75).

    “Analysis of the 2012 NHIS data finds that users of complementary and alternative medicine are 73% female (OR = 2.75). 28”

    From Overview and Feasibility of a Novel Transdisciplinary Integrative Approach to High Impact Chronic Pain in Vermont (2024) · cites this paper as [28]

    The Results report that nearly 60% of CAM users were women, not 73%. They also report that women were more likely than men to use CAM (OR = 2.8), which is close to the cited OR of 2.75. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The PATH gender mix (76.4% female) is typical of an HICP population that uses integrative health.

    “The PATH gender mix (76.4% female) is typical of an HICP population that uses integrative health.27,28”

    From Overview and Feasibility of a Novel Transdisciplinary Integrative Approach to High Impact Chronic Pain in Vermont (2024) · cites this paper as [28]

    The Results and Discussion §4.1 report that women were the majority of CAM users in the 2012 US survey, supporting the general point that integrative-health users are more often female. But the paper reports nearly 60% female, not 76.4%, and does not establish that this proportion is typical of an HICP population. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The gender difference in PATH participation may be due to differences in prevalence of HICP, and to females' greater utilization of integrative health.

    “The gender difference in PATH participation may be due to differences in prevalence of HICP, and to females’ greater utilization of integrative health.”

    From Overview and Feasibility of a Novel Transdisciplinary Integrative Approach to High Impact Chronic Pain in Vermont (2024) · cites this paper as [28]

    The Results and Discussion (§4.1; page unavailable) report that women were about three times more likely than men to use complementary and alternative medicine, supporting the claim about greater use of integrative health. The paper does not assess PATH participation or establish differences in HICP prevalence as an explanation for participation. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 45 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Zhang, Y., Leach, M. J., Hall, H., Sundberg, T., Ward, L., Sibbritt, D., & Adams, J.
Affiliations
University of Technology Sydney (AU)
Corresponding author
Zhang, Yan
ORCID
Venue
Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015
Volume
2015
Pages
1-10
ISSN
  • 1741-427X (ISSN-L)
  • 1741-4288
DOI
10.1155/2015/413173
PMC
PMC4377351
OpenAlex
W1985943551
Cited by
83
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 3
FWCI
17.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Northumbria Research Link (Northumbria University) (acceptedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • UTS ePRESS (University of Technology Sydney) (submittedVersion)
  • UniSA Research Outputs Repository (University of South Australia) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Complementary and Alternative Medicine Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Traditional Chinese Medicine Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Medical Research and Treatments
Keywords
complementary and alternative medicine, gender differences, CAM use, sociodemographic factors, health conditions, back pain, disease prevention, wellness, National Health Interview Survey

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