SynthesisBMJ open2026
Systematic review and meta-analysis of complementary and alternative medicine use during pregnancy in Iran.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the prevalence, patterns and associated factors of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use among pregnant women in Iran.
designA systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. DATA SOURCES: A comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, ScienceDirect and major Iranian databases from inception to 30 November 2024. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: We included observational studies published in peer-reviewed journals that assessed CAM use among pregnant women in Iran and reported prevalence estimates or relevant associated factors. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Data extraction and quality assessment were performed independently by two reviewers using a standardised form and the Quality Assessment Tool. Meta-analyses of proportions were performed using the DerSimonian and Laird random effects model. The between-study heterogeneity was assessed using the I-squared (I²) statistic. Subgroup analysis, 95% prediction intervals (95% PrIs) and sensitivity analysis were conducted to explore the sources of heterogeneity and to evaluate the robustness of the overall effects, respectively. This study followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and was registered with PROSPERO.
results20 studies with a total of 8106 participants were included. The pooled prevalence of CAM use was 49% (95% CI 39% to 59%). The between-study heterogeneity was very high (I
conclusionsNearly half of pregnant women in Iran use CAM, yet disclosure to healthcare providers is low. An actionable implication is the critical need to integrate routine enquiry about CAM use into standard antenatal care to ensure safe practice. Further research is recommended to evaluate the effectiveness, safety and outcomes of CAM use among pregnant women. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42024618490.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.