Exposing the evidence gap for complementary and alternative medicine to be integrated into science-based medicine

Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine

Volumn 104, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 155-161

  Power, Michael ^a   Hopayian, Kevork ^b  

^a Sowerby Centre for Health Informatics   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EAST ANGLIA   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; INTEGRATIVE MEDICINE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC ERROR;

EID: 79959558327     PISSN: 01410768     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1258/jrsm.2011.100271     Document Type: Review

References (32)

1. Chalmers I, Glasziou P. Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence. Lancet 2009;374:86-9.
2. Laurance J. A nudge in the wrong direction. BMJ 2010;341: c7248.
3. MacPherson H, Peters D, Zollman C. Closing the evidence gap in integrative medicine. BMJ 2009;339:b3335.
4. Moerman DE. Meaning, Medicine and the 'Placebo Effect'. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
5. Ernst E. A systematic review of systematic reviews of homeopathy. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2002;54:577-82.
6. Milgrom LR. Homeopathy and the new fundamentalism: a critique of the critics. J Altern Complement Med 2008;14:589-94.
7. National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine. NCCAM Funding: Appropriations History. Bethesda, MD: NCCAM, 2010. See http://nccam.nih.gov/about/budget/appropriations.htm (last checked 22 December 2010).
8. Hopayian K. Why medicine still needs a scientific foundation: restating the hypotheticodeductive model - part one. Br J Gen Pract 2004;54:400-1.
9. Hopayian K. Why medicine still needs a scientific foundation: restating the hypotheticodeductive model - part two. Br J Gen Pract 2004;54:402-3.
10. Paterson C, Dieppe P. Characteristic and incidental (placebo) effects in complex interventions such as acupuncture. BMJ 2005;330:1202-5.
11. Fonnebo V, Grimsgaard S, Walach H, et al. Researching complementary and alternative treatments - the gatekeepers are not at home. BMC Med Res Methodol 2007;7:7.
12. Macpherson H. Pragmatic clinical trials. Complement Ther Med 2004;12:136-40.
13. Savigny P, Kuntze S, Watson P, et al. Low Back Pain: early management of persistent non-specific low back pain. London: National Collaborating Centre for Primary Care and Royal College of General Practitioners, 2009. See http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/pdf/CG88fullguideline.pdf (last checked 11 August 2010).
14. Madsen MV, Gøtzsche PC, Hróbjartsson A. Acupuncture treatment for pain: systematic review of randomised clinical trials with acupuncture, placebo acupuncture, and no acupuncture groups. BMJ 2009;338: a3115.
15. Ernst E. Dissecting the therapeutic response. Swiss Med Wkly 2008;138:23-8.
16. Crow R, Gage H, Hampson S, Hart J, Kimber A, Thomas H. The role of expectancies in the placebo effect and their use in the delivery of health care: a systematic review. Health Technol Assess 1999;3:1-96.
17. Rao JK, Anderson LA, Inui TS, Frankel RM. Communication interventions make a difference in conversations between physicians and patients: a systematic review of the evidence. Med Care 2007;45:340-9.
18. Di Blasi Z, Harkness E, Ernst E, Georgiou A, Kleijnen J. Influence of context effects on health outcomes: a systematic review. Lancet 2001;357:757-62.
19. Ernst E, Resch KL. Concept of true and perceived placebo effects. BMJ 1995;311:551-3.
20. Black C. Assessing complementary practice: building consensus on appropriate research methods. London: The King's Fund, 2009. See http://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/complementary_meds.html (last checked 11 August 2010).
21. Schwartz D, Lellouch J. J Explanatory and pragmatic attitudes in therapeutical trials. J Chronic Dis 1967;20:637-48.
22. Thorpe KE, Zwarenstein M, Oxman AD, et al. A pragmatic-explanatory continuum indicator summary (PRECIS): a tool to help trial designers. J Clin Epidemiol 2009;62:464-75.
23. Zwarenstein M, Treweek S, Gagnier JJ, et al. Improving the reporting of pragmatic trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement. BMJ 2008;337:a2390.
24. Roland M, Torgerson DJ. What are pragmatic trials? BMJ 1998;316:285.
25. Barsky AJ, Saintfort R, Rogers MP, Borus JF. Nonspecific medication side effects and the nocebo phenomenon. JAMA 2002;287:622-7.
26. Cook TD, Campbell DT. Quasi-experimentation: design and analysis issues for field settings. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally, 1979.
27. Gilovich T. How We Know What Isn't So: The Fallibility of Human Reason in Everyday Life. London: Free Press, 2008.
28. Preference Collaborative Review Group. Patients' preferences within randomised trials: systematic review and patient level meta-analysis. BMJ 2008;31:a1864.
29. Haake M, Müller HH, Schade-Brittinger C, et al. German Acupuncture Trials (GERAC) for chronic low back pain: randomized, multicenter, blinded, parallel-group trial with groups. Arch Intern Med 2007;167:1892-8. Erratum in: Arch Intern Med 2007;167:2072.
30. Wood L, Egger M, Gluud LL, et al. Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ 2008;336:601-5.
31. O'Connell NE, Wand BM, Goldacre B. Interpretive bias in acupuncture research? A case study. Eval Health Prof. 2009;32:393-409.
32. CONSORT Group. The CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials. CONSORT: Transparent Reporting of Trials, 2010. See http://www.consort-statement.org (last checked 11 August 2010).