Murdoch Blake, Zarzeczny Amy, Caulfield Timothy
Faculty of Law, Health Law Institute, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Johnson Shoyama Graduate School of Public Policy, University of Regina, Regina, Canada.
BMJ Open. 2018 Feb 28;8(2):e019414. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019414.
To identify the frequency and qualitative characteristics of stem cell-related marketing claims made on websites of clinics featuring common types of complementary and alternative medicine practitioners. The involvement of complementary and alternative medicine practitioners in the marketing of stem cell therapies and stem cell-related interventions is understudied. This research explores the extent to which they are involved and collaborate with medical professionals. This knowledge will help with identifying and evaluating potential policy responses to this growing market.
Systematic website analysis.
Global. US and English-language bias due to methodology.
Representations made on clinic websites in relation to practitioner types, stem cell therapies and their targets, stem cell-related interventions. Statements about stem cell therapies relating to evidence of inefficacy, limited evidence of efficacy, general procedural risks, risks specific to the mode of therapy, regulatory status, experimental or unproven nature of therapy. Use of hype language (eg, language that exaggerates potential benefits).
243 websites offered stem cell therapies. Many websites advertised stem cell transplantation from multiple sources, such as adipose-derived (112), bone marrow-derived (100), blood-derived (28), umbilical cord-derived (26) and others. Plant stem cell-based treatments and products (20) were also advertised. Purposes for and targets of treatment included pain, physical injury, a wide range of diseases and illnesses, cosmetic concerns, non-cosmetic ageing, sexual enhancement and others. Medical doctors (130), chiropractors (53) and naturopaths (44) commonly work in the clinics we found to be offering stem cell therapies. Few clinic websites advertising stem cell therapies included important additional information, including statements about evidence of inefficacy (present on only 12.76% of websites), statements about limited evidence of efficacy (18.93%), statements of general risks (24.69%), statements of risks specific to the mode(s) of therapy (5.76%), statements as to the regulatory status of the therapies (30.86%) and statements that the therapy is experimental or unproven (33.33%). Hype language was noted (31.69%).
Stem cell therapies and related interventions are marketed for a wide breadth of conditions and are being offered by complementary and alternative practitioners, often in conjunction with medical doctors. Consumer protection and truth-in-advertising regulation could play important roles in addressing misleading marketing practices in this area.
确定提供常见类型补充和替代医学从业者服务的诊所网站上与干细胞相关的营销宣传的频率和定性特征。补充和替代医学从业者在干细胞疗法及与干细胞相关干预措施的营销方面的参与情况尚未得到充分研究。本研究探讨他们在多大程度上参与其中并与医学专业人员合作。这些信息将有助于识别和评估针对这个不断增长的市场的潜在政策应对措施。
系统性网站分析。
全球。由于方法的原因存在美国和英语语言偏向。
诊所网站上关于从业者类型、干细胞疗法及其目标、与干细胞相关的干预措施的表述。关于干细胞疗法的无效证据、有限疗效证据、一般程序风险、特定治疗方式风险、监管状态、治疗的实验性或未经证实性质的陈述。夸张性语言的使用（例如，夸大潜在益处的语言）。
243个网站提供干细胞疗法。许多网站宣传来自多种来源的干细胞移植，如脂肪来源（112个）、骨髓来源（100个）、血液来源（28个）、脐带来源（26个）及其他。基于植物干细胞的治疗方法和产品（20个）也有宣传。治疗目的和目标包括疼痛、身体损伤、多种疾病、美容问题、非美容性衰老、性增强等。我们发现提供干细胞疗法的诊所中，医生（130名）、脊椎按摩师（53名）和自然疗法医生（44名）较为常见。很少有宣传干细胞疗法的诊所网站包含重要的补充信息，包括关于无效证据的陈述（仅12.76%的网站有）、有限疗效证据的陈述（18.93%）、一般风险的陈述（24.69%）、特定治疗方式风险的陈述（5.76%）、疗法监管状态的陈述（30.86%）以及疗法是实验性或未经证实的陈述（33.33%）。发现有夸张性语言（31.69%）。
干细胞疗法及相关干预措施针对广泛的病症进行营销，并且由补充和替代医学从业者提供，通常与医生合作。消费者保护和真实广告监管在解决该领域误导性营销行为方面可能发挥重要作用。
