Physicians

BACKGROUND: Clinical trial evidence in controversial areas such as complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) must be approached with an open mind. OBJECTIVE: To determine what factors may influence practitioners' interpretation of evidence from CAM trials. RESEARCH DESIGN: In a mailed survey of 2400 US CAM and conventional medicine practitioners we included 2 hypothetical factorial vignettes of positive and negative research results for CAM clinical trials. Vignettes contained randomly varied journal (Annals of Internal Medicine vs.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trial evidence in controversial areas such as complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) must be approached with an open mind. OBJECTIVE: To determine what factors may influence practitioners' interpretation of evidence from CAM trials. RESEARCH DESIGN: In a mailed survey of 2400 US CAM and conventional medicine practitioners we included 2 hypothetical factorial vignettes of positive and negative research results for CAM clinical trials. Vignettes contained randomly varied journal (Annals of Internal Medicine vs.

The pharmaceutical industry's wide range of interactions with physicians, trainees, and other medical professionals--interactions that include information transfer and financial incentives--has been the source of undue influences, especially on physicians' prescription behavior. Current literature has mainly been focused on the financial element of these influences, and the problems in medical professional-pharmaceutical industry interactions are mainly viewed in terms of conflicts of interest.

A significant proportion of physicians and medical trainees experience stress-related anxiety and burnout resulting in increased absenteeism and disability, decreased patient satisfaction, and increased rates of medical errors. A review and meta-analysis was conducted to examine the effectiveness of interventions aimed at addressing stress, anxiety, and burnout in physicians and medical trainees. Twelve studies involving 1034 participants were included in three meta-analyses.

A reflection on the scientific behavior of adherents of conventional medicine toward one form of alternative medicine-homeopathy-teaches us that physicians do reject seemingly solid evidence because it is not compatible with theory. Further reflection, however, shows that physicians do the same within conventional medical science: Sometimes they discard a theory because of new facts, but at other times they cling to a theory despite the facts. This essay highlights the seeming contradiction and discusses whether it still permits the building of rational medical science.

This systematic review aims to estimate the prevalence of use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) by physicians in the UK. Five databases were searched for surveys monitoring the prevalence of use of CAM, which were published between 1 January 1995 and 7 December 2011. In total, 14 papers that reported 13 separate surveys met our inclusion criteria. Most were of poor methodological quality. The average prevalence of use of CAM across all surveys was 20.6% (range 12.1-32%).

BACKGROUND: Clinically relevant drug-drug interactions (DDIs) must be recognized in a timely manner and managed appropriately to prevent adverse drug reactions or therapeutic failure. Because the evidence for most DDIs is based on case reports or poorly documented clinical information, there is a need for better assessment of their clinical relevance.

Many patients with cancer use complementary and alternative medical (CAM) therapies. Physicians need authoritative information on CAM therapies to responsibly advise patients who seek these interventions. This article summarizes current evidence on the efficacy and safety of selected CAM therapies that are commonly used by patients with cancer. The following major categories of interventions are covered: dietary modification and supplementation, herbal products and other biological agents, acupuncture, massage, exercise, and psychological and mind-body therapies.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trial evidence in controversial areas such as complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) must be approached with an open mind. OBJECTIVE: To determine what factors may influence practitioners' interpretation of evidence from CAM trials. RESEARCH DESIGN: In a mailed survey of 2400 US CAM and conventional medicine practitioners we included 2 hypothetical factorial vignettes of positive and negative research results for CAM clinical trials. Vignettes contained randomly varied journal (Annals of Internal Medicine vs.

This systematic review aims to estimate the prevalence of use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) by physicians in the UK. Five databases were searched for surveys monitoring the prevalence of use of CAM, which were published between 1 January 1995 and 7 December 2011. In total, 14 papers that reported 13 separate surveys met our inclusion criteria. Most were of poor methodological quality. The average prevalence of use of CAM across all surveys was 20.6% (range 12.1-32%).