Skip to main content

Table 2 Description and methodological assessment of the included studies

From: Perception of risk and communication among conventional and complementary health care providers involving cancer patients’ use of complementary therapies: a literature review

Study ID Objectives Participants Setting Research design Methodological assessment (are the results of the study valid? Yes/No/Can’t tell) Main findings (themes) Country Funding
Barrett B, 2000 [38] The nature of practice, healing philosophy, choices of therapeutic methods and ideas about the use of therapeutic modalities 17 CAM and conventional medicine patients and 20 CAM practitioners Home office, public places in the Madison, Wisconsin area Semi structured interviews Yes Risk communication and perception, indirect risk and knowledge about CAM USA Not reported
Baynham-Fletcher L, 2008 [39] Standard for credentialing CIMa therapies between-state and between-institutions Credentialing process MD Andersen cancer setting Descriptive study of the credentialing process for CIMa practitioners Can’t tell Information, knowledge and indirect risk about CIMa USA Not reported
Ben-Arye E, 2012 a [34] Patient-provider communication about complementary approaches and implementation and integration of CMb in health care 23 articles Spescial issues of the Journal Patient Education and Counseling Assessing articles of different qualitative methods, such as literature reviews, empirical descriptive studies and interviews Can’t tell Risk communication and indirect risk International Not reported
Ben-Arye E, 2012 b [51] CAM research in support cancer care 85 articles in Arabic, Hebrew, French and Turkish Medline/PubMed, ULAKBIM the Turkish Academic network and Information Centre Literature review Yes Risk communication, direct and indirect risk Israel, Turkey, Iran, Saudi-Arabia, Palestine, Jordan and Egypt Not reported
Ben-Arye E, 2013 [40] Provide oncologists with models for Integrative CMb within supporting care Physicians leading six integrative oncology practices MD Andersen, Penny Brohn, Herdecke Community Hospital, Lin Medical Center, Rambam Health Care Campus, Fundaleu Institute Descriptive analysis of key elements which facilitates CMb integration Yes Indirect risk and communication USA, UK, Germany, Israel and Argentina The Israeli Society for Complementary Medicine, the UK College of Medicine, Bnai Zion Medical Center, the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, Lin Medical center of Clait Health Servises, the Academic Study Group for Israel and the Middle East
Broom A, 2009 [24] How oncologists and oncology nurses engage and communicate risks with patients about CAM 13 oncologists, 12 oncology nurses Two main hospitals in a state capital city In-depth interviews Yes Risk perception, direct and indirect risk, risk communication, information about CAM and CMe Australia Not reported
Broom AF, 2013 [30] Excamine oncology clinicians’ accounts of communication with their cancer patiens 16 medical specialists, 5 oncology nurses and 1 oncology clinical psycologist Three hospitals and one palliative care service in Dehli In-depth interviews Yes Direct risk, indirect risk and risk communication, information of CAM and CMe India Australian Research Council (FT100100294)
Fox P, 2012 [35] Different perspectives regarding the role of CAM in the cancer setting 31 women with breast cancer, 13 oncology nurses, 7 oncologists and 20 CAM practitioners Not reported Semi structured interviews Yes Indirect risk, direct risk and risk communication Ireland Not reported
Fox P, 2013 [36] Rate and type of CAM used by women with breast cancer, reasons and perceptions of the utility of the CAM terapies used 20 oncology professionals (13 oncology nurser, 7 oncologists), 20 CAM practitioners Not reported Semi structured interviews, survey Yes Indirect risk, direct risk, risk communication Ireland Irish Cancer Society
Frenkel M, 2010 [14] Overview of the literature regarding communication in cancer care related to the use of CAM. Discuss a possible model of effective patient-physician communication   Not reported Literature overview Can’t tell Indirect risk, risk perception, risk communication International No financial support
Goldstein, 2003 [41] The role of CAM in oncology    Theoretical paper Can’t tell Indirect risk USA Not reported
Jason SL, 2009 [46] Examine CAM discussion of oncologists, patients and companions on first time consultation visits at comprehensive outpatient clinic for CAM discussions 93 video tape consultation interactions of 13 oncologists, 93 patients and 82 visit companions National Cancer Institute-designated cancer senter and teaching hospital outpatient clinic in a large urban Midwestern city Qualitative observational study Yes Risk communication, information about CAM and CMe USA Not reported
Klimenko E, 2007 [31] Investigate definition of health, disease and healing 4 medical physicians, 2 psychiatrists, 1 psychologist and 7 CAM practitioners   Delhi process Yes Risk perception, indirect risk, risk communication, information about CAM and CMe USA Not reported
Mackereth PA, 2009 [42] Uncover complemetary therapists’ motivation to work in cancer/supportive and palliative care setting 19 nurses, 2 doctors, 3physiotherapists, 27 CAM therapists One hospice, one cancer care hospital, one cancer care senter Questionnaire survey followed by semi-structured interviews Yes Indirect risk, information about CAM and CMe UK The Big Lottery Fund
Mackereth PA, 2010 [50] Investigate CAM providers’ challenges of working in cancer care settings and the value of clinical supervision 15 CAM therapists Five cancer care senters Focus group interview Yes Indirect risk UK Not reported
Madjar I, 2007 [47] Provide insigth into how physicians perceive cancer patients who decide to forgo or stop medically recommended therapies 12 medical and radiation oncologists Two regional oncology senters Individual semi-structured interview Yes Risk communication, indirect risk Israel, Australia Israeli Cancer Association, Newcastle Mater Hospital Margareth Mitchell Research Fund, Australia
Maha N, 2007 [32] Explore academic doctors’ use of CAM and its role within the NHSc, along with rationales given for these views 9 doctors with a dual clinical and academic role Study participants’ work place Semi-structured interview Yes Indirect risk, risk perception, risk communication, information about CAM and CMe UK Not reported
Mazor KM, 2013 [43] Assess patient-centered communication in cancer care, stakeholder perspective 37 cancer patients, 17 family members, 52 clinicians Cancer research networks, cancer communication research senter Semi-structured interview Yes Indirect risk, risk communication, information about CAM and CMe   A grant from Cancer Communication Research Center (P20CA137219). Cancer research network pilot grant (U19CA79689), grant from National Center for advancing Translational Science ((UI1TR000161)
Popper-Giveon A, 2012 [48] Assess the role of CAM therapists who treat cancer patients to promote patients’ well-being during chemotherapy and advance stage of disease 27 Arabic therapists (folk healers, complementary therapists and religious-spiritual healers) Not reported Semi-structured interviews Yes Risk communication Israel A grant from Clalit Research Institute by Clalit Health Services
Popper-Giveon A, 2013 [37] The attitudes towards integrative medicine among CTMd terapists’ who treat Arab cancerpatients in Israel 27 arab therapists (folk healers, complementary therapist and religious-spiritual healer) Not reported Semi-structured interviews Yes Indirect risk, direct risk, risk communication Israel A grant from Clalit Research Institute by Clalit Health Services
Richardson P, 2012 [44] Highlight the importance of spirituality and religion in cancer care   Not reported Literature review Can’t tell Indirect risk, information about CAM and CMe USA Not reported
Roberts D, 2005 [33] Discuss the current policies, perceptions and expectations regarding the use of complementary therapies in cancer care Different policy documents   Literature review Can’t tell Indirect risk, risk communication, risk perception UK Not reported
Salamonsen A, 2015 [23] Doctor-patient communication and how this communication influences treatment decisions 9 patients from the Registry of Exceptional Courses of Disease Participants’ home or other places where the participants were comfortable In-depth interview Yes Risk communication Norway No financial support
Schiff E, 2011 [52] Improve communication between physicians and CAM practitioners One main panel (n = 16), one extended panel (n = 25), one conference discussion forum (n = 247), survey (n = 1254) Various places Delphi process and one survey Yes Indirect risk, risk communication Israel Not reported
Schofield P, 2010 [25] Discuss CAM in oncology consultations and develop quidelines 37 included papers MedLine, Cinahl and PsyInfo Systematic literature review Yes Risk perception, direct risk, indirect risk, risk communication Australia The National Breast and Ovarian Cancer Centre
Verhoef M, 2007 [49] Evaluate a research framework for cancer care using a complex whole system research model    Methodological paper/whole system research Yes    
Verhoef MJ, 2008 [45] Physicians’ responsibility to discuss CAM with patients. Ethical perspectives    Opinion of an expert Yes Indirect risk Canada Supported by The Canadian Cancer Society
  1. aCIM: Complementary and Integrative Medicine, bCM: Complementary Medicine, cNHS: National Health Service, d CTM: Complementary and Traditional Medicine, eConventional Medicine