Assessing alternative medicine: Methodological and research policy concerns

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care

Volumn 19, Issue 3, 2003, Pages 435-445

  Linder, Stephen H ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

Author keywords

Complementary therapies; Decision support techniques; Research support

Indexed keywords

INVESTMENTS; MEDICINE; PUBLIC POLICY; RESEARCH;

CLINICAL EVIDENCES; TAXANOMY;

HEALTH CARE;

ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; DECISION MAKING; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; METHODOLOGY; MONEY; POLICY; REVIEW; SCREENING; TAXONOMY; ARTICLE; BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; CLASSIFICATION; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; HEALTH CARE AND PUBLIC HEALTH; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMAN; RESEARCH; UNITED STATES;

BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; HEALTH CARE AND PUBLIC HEALTH;

COMPLEMENTARY THERAPIES; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS, CLINICAL; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH POLICY; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMANS; NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH (U.S.); RESEARCH; RESEARCH SUPPORT; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0141541716     PISSN: 02664623     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0266462303000382     Document Type: Review

References (18)

1. Bird C. Gaston Naessens vs. scientific medicine: Brilliant French-born Canadian biologist continues his struggle against the cancer establishment. Townsend Letterfor Doctors and Patients. 1991;94:313-320.
2. Boik J. Cancer and natural medicine: A textbook of basic science and clinical research. Princeton, MN: Oregon Medical Press; 1995.
3. Campbell D, Stanley J. Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally; 1963.
4. Cassileth B, Chapman C. Alternative and complementary cancer therapies. Cancer. 1996;77:1026-1034.
5. Cochran WG. Planning and analysis of observational studies. New York: Wiley; 1983.
6. Ember L. Alternative medicine slammed. Chem Eng News. 1997;75:17-18.
7. Evers M. Testimony Submitted to the U.S. Senate Labor and Human Resource, Subcommittee on Public Health and Safety, 105th Congress. Washington, DC: October 15, 1997.
8. Fisher RA. The design of experiments. New York: Hafner; 1935.
9. Hawkins M, Friedman M. National Cancer Institute's evaluation of unconventional cancer treatments. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1992;84:1699-1702.
10. Jonas W, Jacobs J, Dossey L. Healing with homeopathy: The doctor's guide. New York: Warner Books; 1998.
11. Lemer M. Choices in healing: Integrating the best of conventional and complementary approaches to cancer. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1994.
12. Marshall E. The politics of alternative medicine. Science. 1994;265:2000-2002.
13. Moss RW. Cancer therapy: The independent consumer's guide to non-toxic treatment and prevention. New York: Equinox Press; 1992.
14. National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine. Expanding horizons of healthcare, strategic plan, 2000-2005. Available at: www.nccam.nih.gov/strategic. Accessed
15. Office of Technology Assessment. Unconventional cancer treatments. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office; 1990.
16. Sokal R, Sneath P. 1963. Principles of numerical taxonomy. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.
17. Vickers A, Cassileth B, Ernst E, et al. How should we research unconventional therapies? Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1997;13:111-121.
18. Yates F. Sampling methods for census and surveys. New York: Hafner; 1960.