Challenges in Systematic Reviews of Complementary and Alternative Medicine Topics

Paul G. Shekelle, Sally C. Morton, Marika Booth, Nina Buscemi, Carol Friesen

ResearchPosted on rand.org 2005Published in: Annals of Internal Medicine, v. 142, no. 12, pt. 2, June 21, 2005, p. 1042-1047, W-246-W-248

The use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) continues to grow in the United States. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality has devoted a substantial proportion of the Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC) program to systematic reviews of CAM. Such syntheses present different challenges from those conducted on western medicine topics, and in many ways are more difficult. The author discuss 3 challenges: identifying evidence about CAM, assessing the quality of individual studies, and addressing rare serious adverse events. The author use illustrations from EPC evidence reports to show readers approaches to the 3 areas and then present specific recommendations for each issue.

Read More

Topics

Document Details

  • Copyright: American College of Physicians
  • Availability: Non-RAND
  • Year: 2005
  • Pages: 9
  • Document Number: EP-200506-10

This publication is part of the RAND external publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.