↓ Skip to main content

Complementary and alternative medicine usage among cardiac patients: a descriptive study

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Citations

dimensions_citation
21 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 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
Complementary and alternative medicine usage among cardiac patients: a descriptive study
Published in
BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, March 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12906-015-0610-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mandreker Bahall

Abstract

The use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) persists, despite the availability of conventional medicine (CM), modernisation, globalisation, technological advancement, and limited scientific evidence supporting CAM. People with cardiovascular diseases often use CAM, despite possible major adverse effects and lack of evidence supporting CAM claims. This study explored CAM use among cardiac patients, the types of CAM used, reasons and factors that influence its use, and the association between patient demographics and CAM use. This cross-sectional quantitative study was conducted using quota sampling to survey 329 public clinic adult cardiac patients within the South-West Regional Health Authority (SWRHA) of Trinidad and Tobago. From 1 July 2012 to 31August 2012, each participant completed questionnaires, after consenting to participate. Data analysis included χ(2) tests and binary logistic regression. One hundred eighty-five (56.2%; standard error [SE] = 2.74%) patients used CAM. Herbal medicine was the most common CAM (85.9%; SE = 2.56%), followed by spiritual therapy/mind-body systems (61.6%; SE = 3.58%), physical therapy/body manipulation (13.5%; SE = 2.51%), alternative systems (8.1%; SE = 2.01%), and other methods (3.8%; SE = 1. 41%). The patients believed that CAM promotes health and wellness (79.5%; SE = 2.97%), assists in fighting illness (78.9%; SE = 3.00%), addresses the limitations of CM (69.2%; SE = 3.56%), alleviates symptoms (21.6%; SE = 6.51%), costs less than CM (21.6 %, SE = 3.03), and has fewer adverse/damaging effects than CM (29.7, SE =3.36), or they were disappointed with CM (12.4%, SE = 2.42). Ethnicity and religion were associated with CAM usage, but only ethnicity was a useful predictor of CAM use. Complementary and alternative medicine use was high among cardiac patients (56.2%, SE = 2.74%), and associated with ethnicity and religion. Friends, family, and perceived mode of action influenced a patient's use of CAM.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Brunei Darussalam 1 1%
Unknown 98 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 20 20%
Lecturer 19 19%
Student > Master 13 13%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 4 4%
Other 4 4%
Other 12 12%
Unknown 27 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 30 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 13%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 4%
Computer Science 3 3%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Other 15 15%
Unknown 31 31%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 July 2020.
All research outputs
#2,936,216
of 16,629,244 outputs
Outputs from BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
#607
of 2,969 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,389
of 228,791 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,629,244 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,969 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 228,791 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
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