Kelner Merrijoy, Snider Beverly, Wellman Peter
Institute for Human Development, Life Course and Aging, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Healthc Pap. 2003;3(5):10-28. doi: 10.12927/hcpap..17104.
Using a sociological viewpoint, this paper examines the range of definitions for complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) and discusses the evidence base for its efficacy and safety. The question of what constitutes evidence is considered from various perspectives: biomedical, CAM, consumers and practitioners. The authors conclude that all these perspectives are required in order to fully understand the appeal of CAM in Canadian society's search for appropriate healthcare. Most important, the complexity of methods for assessing the evidence about CAM is addressed. An inclusive approach is urged that goes well beyond randomized clinical trials. Policy recommendations are made in three areas: research, regulation and funding.
本文运用社会学视角,审视了补充与替代医学(CAM)的定义范畴,并探讨了其疗效与安全性的证据基础。从生物医学、补充与替代医学、消费者及从业者等不同角度,考量了何为证据这一问题。作者们得出结论,为全面理解补充与替代医学在加拿大社会寻求适宜医疗保健过程中的吸引力,所有这些视角均不可或缺。最为重要的是,探讨了评估补充与替代医学相关证据的方法的复杂性。文中敦促采用一种远不止于随机临床试验的包容性方法。在研究、监管和资金三个领域提出了政策建议。