Evidence mapPaperPMID 33769512Full record

GuidelineJournal of the National Cancer Institute2022

Addressing Complementary and Alternative Medicine Use Among Individuals With Cancer: An Integrative Review and Clinical Practice Guideline.

Lynda G Balneaves, Cody Z Watling, Emilie N Hayward, Brenda Ross, Jill Taylor-Brown, Antony Porcino, Tracy L O Truant

Abstract readReviewPractice Guideline
In one paragraph

Guideline in Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Exploring primary care physician feedback following an integrative oncology consultation.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2023
    Trial
  3. Online cancer forums and complementary and alternative medicine in cancer care: effects of ehealth literacy and psychological distress on use and attitudes.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Cancer patients' behaviors and attitudes toward natural health products.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2023
    Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Lynda G BalneavesCollege of Nursing, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-6535-2096
Cody Z WatlingCollege of Nursing, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-6643-9660
Emilie N HaywardCollege of Nursing, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.
Brenda RossBC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Jill Taylor-BrownPatient and Family Support Services, CancerCare Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-7035-4611
Antony PorcinoBC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-4053-5654
Tracy L O TruantSchool of Nursing, Faculty of Applied Science, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use is common among individuals with cancer, but many choose not to discuss CAM with health-care providers (HCPs). Moreover, there is variability in the provision of evidence-informed decision making about CAM use. A clinical practice guideline was developed to standardize how oncology HCPs address CAM use as well as to inform how individuals with cancer can be supported in making evidence-informed decisions about CAM. An integrative review of the literature, from inception to December 31, 2018, was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychINFO, CINAHL, and AMED databases. Eligible articles included oncology HCPs' practice related to discussing, assessing, documenting, providing decision support, or offering information about CAM. Two authors independently searched the literature, and selected articles were summarized. Recommendations for clinical practice were formulated from the appraised evidence and clinical experiences of the research team. An expert panel reviewed the guideline for usability and appropriateness and recommendations were finalized. The majority of the 30 studies eligible for inclusion were either observational or qualitative, with only 3 being reviews and 3 being experimental. From the literature, 7 practice recommendations were formulated for oncology HCPs regarding how to address CAM use by individuals with cancer, including communicating, assessing, educating, decision coaching, documenting, active monitoring, and adverse event reporting. It is imperative for safe and comprehensive care that oncology HCPs address CAM use as part of standard practice. This clinical practice guideline offers directions on how to support evidence-informed decision making about CAM among individuals with cancer.

Indexed as

Complementary TherapiesNeoplasmsHealth PersonnelHumansMedical Oncology

Identifiers

PMID33769512
PMCPMC8755493

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.