Obstacles to research in complementary and alternative medicine

Ernst, Edzard

doi:10.5694/j.1326-5377.2003.tb05546.x

Topics

Complementary therapies

If we address the obstacles, high quality CAM research is possible

Peninsula Medical School, Exeter, Devon, UK.

Correspondence:

1. Ernst E. Prevalence of use of complementary/alternative medicine: a systematic review. Bull World Health Organ 2000; 78: 252-257.
2. Evans D. Placebo, the belief effect. London: Harper Collins, 2003: 141-164.
3. Ernst E, Pittler MH, Stevinson C, White AR. The desktop guide to complementary and alternative medicine. Edinburgh: Mosby, 2001.
4. Tang JL, Zhan SY, Ernst E. Review of randomised controlled trials of traditional Chinese medicine. BMJ 1999; 319: 160-161.
5. Linde K, Jonas WB, Melchart D, Willich S. The methodological quality of randomised controlled trials of homeopathy, herbal medicine and acupuncture. Int J Epidemiol 2001; 30: 526-531.
6. Hyodo I, Eguchi K, Nishina T, et al. Perceptions and attitudes of clinical oncologists on complementary and alternative medicine. Cancer 2003; 97: 2861-2868.
7. Ernst E, Wider B. Only 0.08% of funding for research in NHS goes to complementary medicine. BMJ 1996; 313: 882.
8. Lewith GT, Jonas WB, Walach H. Clinical research in complementary therapies. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone, 2002.
9. Vickers A, Cassileth B, Ernst E, et al. How should we research unconventional therapies? A panel report from the conference on Complementary and Alternative Medicine Research Methodology, National Institute of Health. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1997; 13: 111-121.
10. British Medical Association. Medical ethics today, its practice and philosophy. London: BMA, 1993.
11. Ernst E, Cohen MH. Informed consent in complementary and alternative medicine. Arch Intern Med 2001; 161: 2288-2292.

Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.