↓ Skip to main content

Use of complementary and alternative medicine by patients with cancer: a cross-sectional study at different points of cancer care

Overview of attention for article published in Medical Oncology, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 Mendeley
Title
Use of complementary and alternative medicine by patients with cancer: a cross-sectional study at different points of cancer care
Published in
Medical Oncology, June 2016
DOI 10.1007/s12032-016-0790-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

J. Kleine Wortmann, A. Bremer, HT Eich, HP Kleine Wortmann, A. Schuster, J. Fühner, J. Büntzel, R. Muecke, FJ Prott, J. Huebner

Abstract

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is widely used by cancer patients. In order to learn more on the usage of CAM, its reasons and motifs as well as sources of information along the trajectory of treatment, we decided to evaluate the prevalence and predictors for the use of CAM by cancer patients while being under active treatment with chemo- or radiotherapy or in aftercare. We distributed a standardized questionnaire among patients attending a department of radio-oncology, an ambulance for oncology and offices of general practitioners (GPs). Five hundred and six patients took part. Most attributed cancer to stress and trauma (23.7 and 16.4 %) or genes (20.8 %). Forty-four percentage reported knowing a physician with competence in CAM, and in all settings, most patients named the GP. Fifty-one percentage admitted using CAM, 35 % informed the oncologist about using CAM, 56 % informed the GP, and 26 % did not inform any physician. Most often used CAM was vitamin D (17 %) and selenium (16 %). Most important goals were to strengthen the immune system (59 %) and become active (52 %). Most patients were satisfied with the CAM methods they used. Yet, with some methods, dissatisfaction was up to 30 %. The GP has an important function concerning CAM in oncology as most patients believe the GP to have best knowledge in CAM. In order to integrate complementary medicine into evidence-based medicine, physicians should be trained on how to communicate on CAM with the patient and with each other. Explaining cancer and cancer therapies in a way lay persons are able to understand may be helpful. Physicians should actively address patients' needs of involvement not only in decision making, but also actively in the therapy.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 13%
Student > Master 7 13%
Researcher 7 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 9%
Other 9 17%
Unknown 12 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 17%
Psychology 7 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 13 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 July 2016.
All research outputs
#8,474,037
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Medical Oncology
#301
of 1,456 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#132,399
of 368,445 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Medical Oncology
#4
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,456 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 368,445 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.