This study aims to explore the conditions complementary and integrative medicine (CIM) practitioners associate with increased intestinal permeability (IP) and the methods they employ to assess IP.
A cross-sectional survey of naturopaths, nutritionists and Western herbal medicine practitioners was undertaken (n = 227) through the Practitioner Research and Collaboration Initiative (PRACI) network.
CIM practitioners (n = 36, response rate 15.9%) associate IP with gastrointestinal (100.0%), autoimmune (91.7%), skin (91.7%), neurological (80.6%), respiratory (55.6%) and liver-related conditions (44.4%). CIM practitioners frequently treat IP (72.7%); observing a minimum 3 months of treatment is required to resolve IP. Patient's signs and symptoms were the main reasons CIM practitioners suspected IP (94.1%).
CIM practitioners observe a clinical link between IP and a wide range of conditions, including those not yet recognised within the literature. The clinical experience of CIM practitioners holds substantial value to the advancement of research and the clinical management of IP.
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 02 November 2020.
All research outputs
#9,061,505
of 27,268,765 outputs
Outputs from Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice
#591
of 1,228 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#137,827
of 348,145 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice
#25
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 27,268,765 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 1,228 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 348,145 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 59% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
