Does ‘traditional’ evidence have a place in contemporary complementary and alternative medicine practice? A case for the value of such evidence

Wiese, Marlene

doi:10.1111/fct.12281

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 20 publications

(37 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…An important finding from this research was that barriers exist across the continuum of evidence, from the generation of evidence, through to access, use and application of evidence. Some of these barriers may relate to cultural norms that determine what constitutes evidence in CAM [82][83][84][85]. While traditional evidence, based on centuries of empirical observation [86], largely has been viewed as an extension of clinical experience in CAM [84], this perception may be in a state of flux.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While traditional evidence, based on centuries of empirical observation [86], largely has been viewed as an extension of clinical experience in CAM [84], this perception may be in a state of flux. There is now ongoing debate about the role and value of traditional evidence in CAM [87], its currency in contemporary practice as a source of valid evidence [83,88], and its incompatibility with the biomedical view [89,90].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An exploration of barriers and enablers to the conduct and application of research among complementary and alternative medicine stakeholders in Australia and New Zealand: A qualitative descriptive study

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Most studies examining complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) stakeholder engagement with evidence-based practice have relied on quantitative research methods, which often fail to capture the nuances of this phenomena. Using qualitative methods, this study aimed to explore the experiences of CAM stakeholders regarding the barriers and enablers to the conduct and application of research. Methods This research was guided by a qualitative descriptive framework. CAM practitioners and researchers of multiple CAM disciplines from across Australia and New Zealand were invited to share their personal perspectives of the study phenomena. Semi-structured interviews were conducted via Zoom, which were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Rigour strategies were applied to ensure the credibility of results. The transcript was analysed using thematic analysis. Results CAM stakeholders identified an array of barriers and enablers to the conduct and application of research within their disciplines. The barriers and enablers that emerged were found to be inter-connected with two similar constructs: capacity and culture. Captured within the construct of capacity were five themes—lack of resources, inadequate governance/leadership, lack of competency, bias directed from outside and within CAM, and lack of time for research. Within the construct of culture were two themes—intrinsic perceptions in CAM, and lack of communication within and outside CAM. Conclusions Promoting evidence-based practice and engaging with research in CAM continues to face challenges. This study, for the first time, has highlighted the multitude of interlinked barriers that confront CAM stakeholders when engaging with research. These findings highlight the need for a concerted and targeted approach to tackle these challenges.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An exploration of barriers and enablers to the conduct and application of research among complementary and alternative medicine stakeholders in Australia and New Zealand: A qualitative descriptive study

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our review findings elucidate the criteria applied by researchers in such processes of translation, as well as identifying several areas in need of greater engagement to fill translational gaps. The tension between traditional medicine systems and evidence‐based medicine in applied practice has been a source of challenge (Fung et al, 2015), opportunity (Jutte et al, 2017) and debate (Leach, 2016; Wiese, 2016) in recent years. By mapping the reviewed literature through an implementation science perspective using an adapted EPIS framework (Movsisyan et al, 2019), our study provides important insights on how to better bridge the gap between TK and contemporary health care to achieve appropriate and effective implementation of traditional evidence.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Criteria for the selection, evaluation and application of traditional knowledge in contemporary health practice, education, research and policy: A systematic review

Foley,

Bugarcic,

Adams

et al. 2023

Health Info Libraries J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundTraditional and complementary medicine (T&CM) is highly utilised and draws on traditional knowledge (TK) as evidence, raising a need to explore how TK is currently used.ObjectivesExamine criteria used to select, evaluate and apply TK in contemporary health contexts.MethodsSystematic search utilising academic databases (AMED, CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, SSCI, ProQuest Dissertations Theses Global), Trip clinical database and Google search engine. Citations and reference lists of included articles were searched. Reported use of TK in contemporary settings was mapped against a modified ‘Exploration‐Preparation‐Implementation‐Sustainment’ (EPIS) implementation framework.ResultsFrom the 54 included articles, EPIS mapping found TK is primarily used in the Exploration phase of implementation (n = 54), with little reporting on Preparation (n = 16), Implementation process (n = 6) or Sustainment (n = 4) of TK implementation. Criteria used in selection, evaluation and application of TK commonly involved validation with other scientific/traditional evidence sources, or assessment of factors influencing knowledge translation.DiscussionOne of the difficulties in validation of TK (as a co‐opted treatment) against other evidence sources is comparing like with like as TK often takes a holistic approach. This complicates further planning and evaluation of implementation.ConclusionThis review identifies important criteria for evaluating current and potential contemporary use of TK, identifying gaps in research and practice for finding, appraising and applying relevant TK studies for clinical care.

show abstract

Setting an agenda for strengthening the evidence-base for traditional and complementary medicines: Perspectives from an expert forum in Australia

Canaway

Leach

Hunter

2018

Advances in Integrative Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Does ‘traditional’ evidence have a place in contemporary complementary and alternative medicine practice? A case for the value of such evidence

Cited by 4 publications

References 20 publications

An exploration of barriers and enablers to the conduct and application of research among complementary and alternative medicine stakeholders in Australia and New Zealand: A qualitative descriptive study

An exploration of barriers and enablers to the conduct and application of research among complementary and alternative medicine stakeholders in Australia and New Zealand: A qualitative descriptive study

Criteria for the selection, evaluation and application of traditional knowledge in contemporary health practice, education, research and policy: A systematic review

Setting an agenda for strengthening the evidence-base for traditional and complementary medicines: Perspectives from an expert forum in Australia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About