Complementary and alternative therapies in the scientific literature

Objective

The main objective of the study is the analysis of available information about CAM in the scientific literature, for the period 1997–2001.

Materials and methods

Literature searches of Medline were performed in order to identify all articles dealing with CAM, in human setting, from January 1, 1997 to December 31, 2001.

Specific searches were conducted on acupuncture, musculoskeletal manipulation, phytotherapy, and homoeopathy.

Results

During the period 1997–2001, 16 107 articles about CAM were published, representing 0.6% of the total number of Medline-listed articles. Interest towards these therapies has grown, from about 2400 articles in 1997 to about 3900 in 2001, a 62% increase.

In the majority of cases (59%), articles were ‘generic’ publications. Only 13% of articles were clinical trials, 56% of which randomised and controlled.

More than 50% of CAM articles appeared in journals with no IF and 19% in journals with an IF less and equal to one. Only 6.7% of articles were published by prestigious journals with an IF > 5.

Among the selected therapies, the most cited was phytotherapy, followed by acupuncture, manual treatments and homoeopathy. Articles dealing with herbal remedies had a rate of increase of 161.8 articles per year.

Conclusion

A growing interest in CAM was observed in the scientific literature. The limited number of RCTs conducted on CAM, and the low proportion of CAM articles appearing in prestigious journals, suggests that there is not a particular enhancement towards evidence-based research.