Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 640

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

Perceptions about Complementary Therapies Relative to Conventional Therapies among Adults Who Use Both: Results from a National Survey

Eisenberg, David M., Kessler, Ronald C., Van Rompay, Maria I., Kaptchuk, Ted J., Wilkey, Sonja A., Appel, Scott, Davis, Roger B.·2001·Annals of Internal Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Little is known about perceptions of complementary and alternative medical (CAM) therapy relative to conventional therapy among patients who use both. OBJECTIVE: To document perceptions about CAM therapies among persons who use CAM and conventional therapies. DESIGN: Nationally representative, random-household telephone survey. SETTING: The 48 contiguous U.S. states. PARTICIPANTS: 831 adults who saw a medical doctor and used CAM therapies in 1997. MEASUREMENTS: Perceptions about helpfulness and patterns of CAM therapy use relative to conventional therapy use and reasons for nondisclosure of CAM therapies. RESULTS: Of 831 respondents who saw a medical doctor and used CAM therapies in the previous 12 months, 79% perceived the combination to be superior to either one alone. Of 411 respondents who reported seeing both a medical doctor and a CAM provider, 70% typically saw a medical doctor before or concurrent with their visits to a CAM provider; 15% typically saw a CAM provider before seeing a medical doctor. Perceived confidence in CAM providers was not substantially different from confidence in medical doctors. Among the 831 respondents who in the past year had used a CAM therapy and seen a medical doctor, 63% to 72% did not disclose at least one type of CAM therapy to the medical doctor. Among 507 respondents who reported their reasons for nondisclosure of use of 726 alternative therapies, common reasons for nondisclosure were "It wasn't important for the doctor to know" (61%), "The doctor never asked" (60%), "It was none of the doctor's business" (31%), and "The doctor would not understand" (20%). Fewer respondents (14%) thought their doctor would disapprove of or discourage CAM use, and 2% thought their doctor might not continue as their provider. Respondents judged CAM therapies to be more helpful than conventional care for the treatment of headache and neck and back conditions but considered conventional care to be more helpful than CAM therapy for treatment of hypertension. CONCLUSIONS: National survey data do not support the view that use of CAM therapy in the United States primarily reflects dissatisfaction with conventional care. Adults who use both appear to value both and tend to be less concerned about their medical doctor's disapproval than about their doctor's inability to understand or incorporate CAM therapy use within the context of their medical management.

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 · 10.7326/0003-4819-135-5-200109040-00011

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

Cited by

See all 640

Metadata

Authors
Eisenberg, D. M., Kessler, R. C., Van Rompay, M. I., Kaptchuk, T. J., Wilkey, S. A., Appel, S., & Davis, R. B.
Venue
Annals of Internal Medicine
Published
2001-09-04
Volume
135
Issue
5
Pages
344-351
ISSN
  • 0003-4819 (ISSN-L)
  • 1539-3704
OpenAlex
W1966538325
Cited by
640
References
4
FWCI
73.28
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

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.