Sunita Vohra1, Liliane Zorzela2, Kathi Kemper3, Arine Vlieger4, Shay Pintov5. 1. CARE Program, Dept of Pediatrics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. Electronic address: svohra@ualberta.ca. 2. CARE Program, Dept of Pedaitric, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. Electronic address: zorzela@ulaberta.ca. 3. College of Medicine, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, 43210, United States. Electronic address: kathi.kemper@osumc.edu. 4. Dept of Pediatrics, St Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands. Electronic address: a.vlieger@antoniusziekenhuis.nl. 5. Dept of Pediatrics Kiboga District Government Hospital, Uganda. Electronic address: drpintov@netvision.net.il.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pediatric use of complementary medicine (CM) is common and offers numerous research questions about diverse therapies and conditions. Although research priorities for pediatric CM have been identified, there was a need to update in light of the rapid evolution of the field. METHODS: Building on previous work, we conducted an international, consensus-based 4-step modified Delphi process to develop and refine a pediatric CM research agenda, including on-line questionnaires and an in-person meeting. Participants included health care professionals, researchers, and educators. RESULTS: We received 376 responses; participants included conventional and CM providers, researchers, educators, administrators, and policy-makers from 15 countries (Australia, Bangladesh, Belgium, Canada, China, Germany, India, Israel, Italy, New Zealand, Norway, Sri Lanka, The Netherlands, United Kingdom, and United States). While it was recognized that each region must set their own priorities based on use, access, and expertise, a "minimum set" for a pediatric CM research agenda was identified. After three rounds of surveys, participants identified the highest priorities for pediatric CM research as: (i) safety of CM therapies for infants, children, and adolescents; (ii) conditions for which CM use is highly prevalent and for which conventional medicine lacks safe, cost-effective therapies; iii) therapies/therapists to be examined for quality and reproducibility of interventions, comparative and cost effectiveness, dose, etc.; and iv) identification of relevant outcomes and outcome measurement tools. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study identify that "first do no harm" is the leading research priority for pediatric CM research, followed by more research on effectiveness of CM therapies for conditions not safely and effectively treated with conventional care. In order to improve pediatric health care, interdisciplinary collaborative approaches are needed between CM and conventional providers and researchers.
BACKGROUND: Pediatric use of complementary medicine (CM) is common and offers numerous research questions about diverse therapies and conditions. Although research priorities for pediatric CM have been identified, there was a need to update in light of the rapid evolution of the field. METHODS: Building on previous work, we conducted an international, consensus-based 4-step modified Delphi process to develop and refine a pediatric CM research agenda, including on-line questionnaires and an in-person meeting. Participants included health care professionals, researchers, and educators. RESULTS: We received 376 responses; participants included conventional and CM providers, researchers, educators, administrators, and policy-makers from 15 countries (Australia, Bangladesh, Belgium, Canada, China, Germany, India, Israel, Italy, New Zealand, Norway, Sri Lanka, The Netherlands, United Kingdom, and United States). While it was recognized that each region must set their own priorities based on use, access, and expertise, a "minimum set" for a pediatric CM research agenda was identified. After three rounds of surveys, participants identified the highest priorities for pediatric CM research as: (i) safety of CM therapies for infants, children, and adolescents; (ii) conditions for which CM use is highly prevalent and for which conventional medicine lacks safe, cost-effective therapies; iii) therapies/therapists to be examined for quality and reproducibility of interventions, comparative and cost effectiveness, dose, etc.; and iv) identification of relevant outcomes and outcome measurement tools. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study identify that "first do no harm" is the leading research priority for pediatric CM research, followed by more research on effectiveness of CM therapies for conditions not safely and effectively treated with conventional care. In order to improve pediatric health care, interdisciplinary collaborative approaches are needed between CM and conventional providers and researchers.