Purpose This paper reviews how trust, credibility, and cognitive authority are understood in research on complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) information practices among Chinese immigrant cancer survivors. It argues that this literature is best understood as a process of negotiation across fractured and discontinuous information landscapes, rather than as a simple problem of access, accuracy, or source evaluation. Design/methodology/approach This paper presents a targeted narrative review with integrative conceptual synthesis. A structured audit trail documents search sources, search blocks, inclusion and exclusion criteria, appraisal logic, evidence tiers, and conceptual coding across library and information science (LIS), health communication, immigrant health, integrative oncology, and survivorship research. Findings Three conditions shape CAM information practices: dual pathways of exposure, sociocultural mediation, and platformed credibility. Survivors move between deliberate seeking and incidental encounters, interpret information through language, migration, family, and Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) frameworks, and assess credibility within digital systems that organize visibility, repetition, and social endorsement. Practical implications The review suggests the need for bilingual and culturally responsive credibility support in library, community, and clinical settings. It also shows why future qualitative research should examine disclosure, family mediation, cross-language source comparison, and culturally specific judgments of authority. Originality/value The paper contributes an LIS account of CAM information practices by bringing Wilson's information behavior model, information practices and encountering, Lloyd's fractured information landscapes, and Patrick Wilson's cognitive authority into dialogue. It proposes a conceptual model that explains trust as negotiated across clinical, familial, cultural, community, and platformed authority systems.
Elaine Kong (Sat,) studied this question.