Poster Board Number: 95
Title: A Comparative Bibliometric Analysis of Research in Complementary and Alternative Health
Objective: Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) has become increasingly popular and is gaining more acceptance in conventional medicine. As such, a new health paradigm is emerging: integrative medicine (IM), which emphasizes the therapeutic relationship and makes use of all appropriate therapies, both conventional and alternative. However, little is known about the research literature and publication patterns in this field.
Methods: A bibliometric analysis of research collaboration patterns in published CAM research will occur by analyzing authorship and institutional affiliations. This will provide data about the level of CAM practitioner participation in research, which is a potential marker for the progression of IM. We will conduct a search for research studies published in the top five CAM journals and the top five medical journals by impact factor over the last ten years. Articles will be divided according to clinical research design type and ranked according to the evidence pyramid. Author names and their institutional affiliations will be extracted and whether they are first, middle, or last authors. Descriptive statistics of the number of first authors who are CAM practitioners, how often they published, and who they published with will be calculated.
Results: An analysis of 4,087 abstracts from CAM journals indicates a lack of high evidence studies (randomized controlled trials [RCTs], systematic reviews, meta-analyses). Many pilot studies, case studies, and lab studies were published. In clinical trials, CAM tended not to be compared to placebo or conventional medicine. In high-impact medical journals, 2,781 citations were identified. Primary research studies tended to be RCTs or case reports. There were many review articles. Studies reporting on the efficacy of CAM tended to have negative or no better than placebo results. In both sets of journals, few CAM practitioners were first authors.
Conclusions: CAM journals appear to be the first point of published research in CAM research. Based on abstracts, rigor is not high in the studies published in these journals. The quality of studies varies between the CAM and conventional journals. Syntheses of CAM evidence is a popular publication choice in conventional journals.
Authors: Thane Chambers, Research Librarian, John W. Scott Health Sciences Library; Soleil Surette, Research Librarian, Complementary and Alternative Research and Education, Pediatrics; Trish Chatterley, Public Services Librarian, John W. Scott Health Sciences Library; University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
