Traditional, complementary, and integrative medicine evidence map

A methodology to an overflowing field of data and noise

Bibliographic Data

ID14967211
AuthorsMariana Schveitzer (0000-0001-9833-2932, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil, corresponding author), Mariana Cabral Schveitzer, Carmen Verônica Mendes Abdala (0000-0002-9236-2978, PAHO/WHO Latin American and Caribbean Center on Health Sciences Information (BIREME), São Paulo, Brazil), Caio Fabio Schlechta Portella (0000-0003-1317-1493, Brazilian Academic Consortium for Integrative Health (CABSIN), São Paulo, Brazil), Ricardo Ghelman (0000-0002-6700-6488, Brazilian Academic Consortium for Integrative Health (CABSIN), São Paulo, Brazil)
Year2021
Volume45
Pages1
Publication date2021-04-23
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueRevista Panamericana de Salud Pública (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1020-4989 • E-ISSN: 1680-5348
PublisherPan American Health Organization (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.26633/rpsp.2021.48
PMID33907557
OpenAlexW3156951232
LanguageEN
Citations received5
References cited8

Every day there is criticism about lack of evidence on traditional, complementary, and integrative medicine (TCIM). But is this narrative evidence-based? Are we really missing research about TCIM? Or are we just not looking correctly at the evidence? Evidence maps are a useful method with the dual function of synthesizing available evidence on a specific topic and identifying knowledge gaps. This article presents a six-step evidence map methodology along with recently published TCIM evidence maps, including one related to COVID-19. TCIM evidence maps are useful instruments to inform decision-making for policymakers, health practitioners, and patients

Cartography · Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19 · Geography · Humanities · Complementary and Alternative Medicine Studies · Medicine · Meta-analysis and systematic reviews · Philosophy · Traditional Chinese Medicine Studies

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access