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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
The influence of social context on the treatment outcomes of complementary and alternative medicine: the case of acupuncture and herbal medicine in Japan and the U.S.
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Globalization and Health, April 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12992-015-0103-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jae-Mahn Shim |
| Abstract |
Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM), such as acupuncture and herbal medicine, is popular in many countries. Yet, treatment outcomes of CAM are found to vary significantly between medical trials in different social environments. This paper addresses how the social organization of medicine affects medical treatment outcomes. In particular, it examines the extent to which two popular complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) interventions (acupuncture and herbal medicine) are coordinated with biomedicine and how coordination characteristics are related to the treatment outcomes of the two CAM interventions. This paper conducts an archival analysis of the institutional settings of the CAM interventions in Japan and the U.S. It also conducts a systematic content analysis of the treatment outcomes in 246 acupuncture reports and 528 herbal medicine reports that are conducted in Japan or the U.S. and registered in the Cochrane Library's Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and 716 acupuncture reports and 3,485 herbal medicine reports that are from Japan or the U.S. and listed in MEDLINE. It examines the association between the treatment outcomes of the two interventions and the geographical location of the reports; it also explores how the institutional settings of the interventions are related to the treatment outcomes. Japanese herbal medicine is integrated into the national medical system the most and American herbal medicine the least; American acupuncture and Japanese acupuncture fall in the middle. Treatment outcomes are the most favorable for Japanese herbal medicine and the least favorable for American herbal medicine. The outcomes of American acupuncture and Japanese acupuncture fall in the middle. The co-utilization of CAM with biomedicine can produce difficulties due to tensions between CAM and biomedicine. These difficulties and subsequent CAM treatment outcomes vary, depending on how CAM is institutionalized in relation to biomedicine in the national medical system. Coordinated CAM interventions are more likely to be effective and synergic with biomedicine, when compared to uncoordinated ones. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 44 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 20% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 11% |
| Other | 4 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 7 | 16% |
| Unknown | 8 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 11% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 11% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 9% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 3 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 24% |
| Unknown | 10 | 22% |
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 25 April 2015.
All research outputs
#18,407,102
of 22,800,560 outputs
Outputs from Globalization and Health
#1,026
of 1,104 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,194
of 265,098 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Globalization and Health
#12
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,800,560 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,104 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 265,098 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.