Risk and efficacy in biomedical media representations of herbal medicine and complementary and alternative medicine (CAM)

No Thumbnail Available
File version
Author(s)
Lewis, M
Griffith University Author(s)
Primary Supervisor
Other Supervisors
Editor(s)
Date
2011
Size
File type(s)
Location
License
Abstract

The objective of the research was to map the discourse about herbal medicine in Australia’s primary medical journal, the Medical Journal of Australia, over 4 decades. Manifest content analysis of 148 articles about herbal or complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) in journal articles from 1966 to 2008 was undertaken. Issues of risk dominated the discourse about herbal medicine in the journal (70%), with a focus on adverse events (42%) as the most significant risk of herbal and other complementary medicines. Toxicity (23%) and drug interactions (18%) were the most frequently mentioned specific risk items. Items that acknowledged efficacy (32%) outweighed those suggesting ineffectiveness (11%). Case reports, reviews, research articles, and letters all had risk frequencies of more than 70%. Review articles and research articles had a high rate of reference to both risk and benefit. Review articles were found to have greater reference to benefit than risk. Possible reasons for these findings are discussed.

Journal Title

Journal of Evidence-Based Complementary & Alternative Medicine

Conference Title
Book Title
Edition
Volume

16

Issue

3

Thesis Type
Degree Program
School
Patent number
Funder(s)
Grant identifier(s)
Rights Statement
Rights Statement
Item Access Status
Note
Access the data
Related item(s)
Subject

Traditional, complementary and integrative medicine

Traditional, complementary and integrative medicine not elsewhere classified

Persistent link to this record
Citation
Collections