↓ Skip to main content

Perceptions of complementary and alternative medicine among cardiac patients in South Trinidad: a qualitative study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
132 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Perceptions of complementary and alternative medicine among cardiac patients in South Trinidad: a qualitative study
Published in
BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, March 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12906-015-0577-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mandreker Bahall, Mark Edwards

Abstract

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) has been practiced for centuries owing to the absence or limited availability of conventional medicine. CAM has persisted globally with over USD34 billion spent annually, despite modernization, globalization, technological advancement, and limited supportive evidence. The present qualitative study explores the perception of CAM among cardiac patients with respect to rationale, perceived outcomes, influences, and public health concerns. This study used a qualitative, interpretative approach. Twelve cardiac disease patients were recruited from private clinics in South Trinidad and interviewed. The study obtained ethical approval, and all participants provided written consent. The semi-structured interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed, and thematically analyzed. Participants with poor cognitive function, difficulty speaking, and those not understandable owing to language barriers were excluded. CAM use was based largely on patient perception regardless of the clinical reality. The perceived mode of action and its natural character was responsible for the therapeutic outcomes and uses. Participants reported that CAM provided holistic care, improved the quality of life, overcame the limitations of conventional medicine, satisfied their increased expectation for comprehensive care, and prevented or counteracted adverse effects caused by conventional medicine. Participants reported a lack of scientific information on CAM and stated that policy makers should assist patients through increased research, public health education, and improved integration of CAM and conventional medicine. The participants' use of CAM was largely based on perception. CAM was thought to improve therapeutic outcomes, provide holistic care, decrease or prevent complications from conventional medicine, and improve quality of life. Participants acknowledged that they may be ill-informed about the basic concepts or actions of CAM. They urged policymakers to create an environment that assists the public and health care providers in promoting safe and effective CAM practice.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 132 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 130 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 23 17%
Student > Bachelor 21 16%
Lecturer 20 15%
Student > Postgraduate 8 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 6%
Other 20 15%
Unknown 32 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 42 32%
Medicine and Dentistry 27 20%
Social Sciences 5 4%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 4%
Psychology 4 3%
Other 12 9%
Unknown 37 28%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 2015.
All research outputs
#9,738,487
of 15,305,941 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
#1,585
of 2,967 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#125,576
of 226,979 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,305,941 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,967 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 226,979 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them