Hyangsook Lee1, Wenbo Peng2, Amie Steel3, Rebecca Reid4, David Sibbritt2, Jon Adams2. 1. Acupuncture & Meridian Science Research Centre, College of Korean Medicine, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Republic of Korea; Australian Research Centre in Complementary and Integrative Medicine, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia. Electronic address: erc633@khu.ac.kr. 2. Australian Research Centre in Complementary and Integrative Medicine, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia. 3. Australian Research Centre in Complementary and Integrative Medicine, Faculty of Health, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia; Office of Research, Endeavour College of Natural Health, Brisbane, Australia. 4. Office of Research, Endeavour College of Natural Health, Brisbane, Australia.
Abstract
AIMS: To provide a critical analysis of peer-reviewed literature reporting research from practice-based research networks (PBRNs) relating to complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). METHODS: A comprehensive literature search of peer-reviewed literature reporting PBRN research focusing upon CAM was conducted in PubMed, Ovid Medline, EMBASE, and CINAHL from their inceptions to June 2017. PBRN registry and websites of relevant PBRNs were also searched for further information. With regards to the nested PBRN studies included in our review, no study design restrictions were imposed and both empirical research and relevant methodologically-focused manuscripts were included. Methodological quality was evaluated via a number of established tools. RESULTS: A total of 51 articles reporting upon CAM research in PBRNs including six articles outlining CAM-focused PBRN establishment were included in the review. The findings of the literature were categorised as either: health services research (including work examining characteristics of patients and practices, doctor-patient communication, and CAM prevalence); effectiveness/safety research; or feasibility research. While 19 studies from non-CAM focused PBRNs tended to report on CAM prevalence and doctor-patient communication about CAM use, 26 articles from CAM-focused PBRNs reported on the characteristics of CAM users, practice patterns, and effectiveness/safety of CAM practice. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: PBRNs - both CAM-focused and non-CAM focused - have provided a useful platform for research investigations around a number of core CAM-related issues. Given the increasing popularity of CAM use in healthcare and the identified benefits of practice-relevant research, further in-depth CAM research nested within PBRN designs is warranted.
AIMS: To provide a critical analysis of peer-reviewed literature reporting research from practice-based research networks (PBRNs) relating to complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). METHODS: A comprehensive literature search of peer-reviewed literature reporting PBRN research focusing upon CAM was conducted in PubMed, Ovid Medline, EMBASE, and CINAHL from their inceptions to June 2017. PBRN registry and websites of relevant PBRNs were also searched for further information. With regards to the nested PBRN studies included in our review, no study design restrictions were imposed and both empirical research and relevant methodologically-focused manuscripts were included. Methodological quality was evaluated via a number of established tools. RESULTS: A total of 51 articles reporting upon CAM research in PBRNs including six articles outlining CAM-focused PBRN establishment were included in the review. The findings of the literature were categorised as either: health services research (including work examining characteristics of patients and practices, doctor-patient communication, and CAM prevalence); effectiveness/safety research; or feasibility research. While 19 studies from non-CAM focused PBRNs tended to report on CAM prevalence and doctor-patient communication about CAM use, 26 articles from CAM-focused PBRNs reported on the characteristics of CAM users, practice patterns, and effectiveness/safety of CAM practice. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: PBRNs - both CAM-focused and non-CAM focused - have provided a useful platform for research investigations around a number of core CAM-related issues. Given the increasing popularity of CAM use in healthcare and the identified benefits of practice-relevant research, further in-depth CAM research nested within PBRN designs is warranted.