The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository
Warning ePrints Soton is experiencing an issue with some file downloads not being available. We are working hard to fix this. Please bear with us.

An exploratory qualitative study to investigate how patients evaluate complementary and conventional medicine

An exploratory qualitative study to investigate how patients evaluate complementary and conventional medicine
An exploratory qualitative study to investigate how patients evaluate complementary and conventional medicine
Objective: we wish to determine the constructs used by patients to evaluate conventional and complementary medicine (CAM), prioritise these constructs and determine how these characterise patients‘ choice for CAM and conventional medicine.

Methods: a repertory grid technique was employed, in interviews of 20 patients, 10 from a general practice and 10 from a CAM clinic.

Results: CAM was used with greater frequency in chronic illness and generated more constructs than conventional medicine, although the constructs were similar. The priorities for these constructs were different: specificity of treatment and severity of illness were prioritised for conventional medicine and lack of science was prioritised for CAM. The CAM characteristic most commonly cited was non-chemical.

Conclusion: this exploratory initial study suggests that people use very similar criteria to evaluate CAM and conventional medicine. Their choice of treatment was based largely on the type of illness from which they were suffering. Further research is needed in this area.
0965-2299
69-77
Lewith, G.T.
0fc483fa-f17b-47c5-94d9-5c15e65a7625
Chan, J.
7c9ec89b-38f8-4209-9b2f-a067d54621c1
Lewith, G.T.
0fc483fa-f17b-47c5-94d9-5c15e65a7625
Chan, J.
7c9ec89b-38f8-4209-9b2f-a067d54621c1

Lewith, G.T. and Chan, J. (2002) An exploratory qualitative study to investigate how patients evaluate complementary and conventional medicine. Complementary Therapies in Medicine, 10 (2), 69-77. (doi:10.1054/ctim.2002.0524).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Objective: we wish to determine the constructs used by patients to evaluate conventional and complementary medicine (CAM), prioritise these constructs and determine how these characterise patients‘ choice for CAM and conventional medicine.

Methods: a repertory grid technique was employed, in interviews of 20 patients, 10 from a general practice and 10 from a CAM clinic.

Results: CAM was used with greater frequency in chronic illness and generated more constructs than conventional medicine, although the constructs were similar. The priorities for these constructs were different: specificity of treatment and severity of illness were prioritised for conventional medicine and lack of science was prioritised for CAM. The CAM characteristic most commonly cited was non-chemical.

Conclusion: this exploratory initial study suggests that people use very similar criteria to evaluate CAM and conventional medicine. Their choice of treatment was based largely on the type of illness from which they were suffering. Further research is needed in this area.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: June 2002

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 24374
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/24374
ISSN: 0965-2299
PURE UUID: e9b6dc2e-281d-479d-9664-cab522e2c89b

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 30 Mar 2006
Last modified: 07 Jan 2022 22:14

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: G.T. Lewith
Author: J. Chan

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×