What question did this study set out to answer?

To evaluate the rates of and underlying reasons for patients disclosing their complementary medicine use to medical providers.

February 7, 2019Scientific ReportsOpen Access

Disclosure of complementary medicine use to medical providers: a systematic review and meta-analysis

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

To evaluate the rates of and underlying reasons for patients disclosing their complementary medicine use to medical providers.
Systematic review of observational studies published between 2003 and 2016 across AMED, CINAHL, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO (86 studies total).
Meta-analysis of 14 studies that specifically evaluated disclosure rates of biologically-based complementary medicine.
Overall disclosure rates for complementary medicine ranged widely from 7% to 80% across the included studies.
Meta-analysis demonstrated a pooled disclosure rate of 33% (95% CI: 24% to 43%) for biologically-based complementary medicine.
Common drivers of non-disclosure included absent provider inquiry, fear of provider disapproval, and perceived safety of complementary medicine, whereas provider inquiries strongly encouraged disclosure.

Discussion

No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.

Implication

Systematic review and meta-analysis reveals a 33% disclosure rate of biologically-based complementary medicine among patients, highlighting the need for proactive provider communication.

Cite This Study

Foley et al. (2019) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69daafef00ab073a27838e3f https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-38279-8

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Implication

Systematic review and meta-analysis reveals a 33% disclosure rate of biologically-based complementary medicine among patients, highlighting the need for proactive provider communication.

Disclosure of complementary medicine use to medical providers: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Key Points

Discussion

Implication

Cite This Study

Disclosure of complementary medicine use to medical providers: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Key Points

Discussion

Implication

Cite This Study

Also Consider

Also Consider