↓ Skip to main content

Comparing Complementary and Alternative Medicine Use with or without Including Prayer as a Modality in a Local and Diverse United States Jurisdiction

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 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
Comparing Complementary and Alternative Medicine Use with or without Including Prayer as a Modality in a Local and Diverse United States Jurisdiction
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, March 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2017.00056
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brenda Robles, Dawn M. Upchurch, Tony Kuo

Abstract

Few studies to date have examined the utilization of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in a local, ethnically diverse population in the United States (U.S.). Fewer have addressed the differences in their use based on inclusion or exclusion of prayer as a modality. Variable definitions of CAM are known to affect public health surveillance (i.e., continuous, systematic data collection, analysis, and interpretation) or benchmarking (i.e., identifying and comparing key indicators of health to inform community planning) related to this non-mainstream collection of health and wellness therapies. The present study sought to better understand how including or excluding prayer could affect reporting of CAM use among residents of a large, urban U.S. jurisdiction. Using population-weighted data from a cross-sectional Internet panel survey collected as part of a larger countywide population health survey, the study compared use of CAM based on whether prayer or no prayer was included in its definition. Patterns of CAM use by socio-demographic characteristics were described for the two operationalized definitions. Multivariable binomial regression analyses were performed to control for gender, age, race/ethnicity, education, employment, income, and health insurance status. One of the analyses explored the associations between CAM use and racial/ethnic characteristics in the study sample. Los Angeles County, California. A socio-demographically diverse sample of Los Angeles County residents. CAM use (with prayer) and CAM use (excluding prayer). Blacks were among the highest users of CAM when compared to Whites, especially when prayer was included as a CAM modality. Regardless of prayer inclusion, being a woman predicted higher use of CAM. How CAM is defined matters in gauging the utilization of this non-mainstream collection of therapies. Given that surveillance and/or benchmarking data are often used to inform resource allocation and planning decisions, results from the present study suggest that when prayer is included as part of the CAM definition, utilization/volume estimates of its use increased correspondingly, especially among non-White residents of the region.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 2 10%
Researcher 2 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 10%
Librarian 1 5%
Lecturer 1 5%
Other 1 5%
Unknown 11 55%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 2 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 5%
Computer Science 1 5%
Psychology 1 5%
Other 2 10%
Unknown 12 60%
Attention Score in Context

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 21 April 2017.
All research outputs
#17,883,247
of 22,961,203 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#5,031
of 10,104 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,260
of 309,329 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#60
of 93 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,961,203 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,104 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% 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 309,329 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 93 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.