Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
Published in: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 1/2020

Open Access 01-12-2020 | Research article

Web-based online resources about adverse interactions or side effects associated with complementary and alternative medicine: a systematic review, summarization and quality assessment

Authors: Jeremy Y. Ng, Vanessa Munford, Harmy Thakar

Published in: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making | Issue 1/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Given an increased global prevalence of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use, healthcare providers commonly seek CAM-related health information online. Numerous online resources containing CAM-specific information exist, many of which are readily available/accessible, containing information shareable with their patients. To the authors’ knowledge, no study has summarized nor assessed the quality of content contained within these online resources for at least a decade, specifically pertaining to information about adverse effects or interactions.

Methods

This study provides summaries of web-based online resources that provide safety information on potential interactions or adverse effects of CAM. Specifically, clinicians are the intended users of these online resources containing patient information which they can then disseminate to their patients. All online resources were assessed for content quality using the validated rating tool, DISCERN.

Results

Of 21 articles identified in our previously published scoping review, 23 online resources were eligible. DISCERN assessments suggests that online resources containing CAM-specific information vary in quality. Summed DISCERN scores had a mean of 56.13 (SD = 10.25) out of 75. Online resources with the highest total DISCERN scores across all questions included Micromedex (68.50), Merck Manual (67.50) and Drugs.com (66.50). Online resources with the lowest total scores included Drug Information (33.00), Caremark Drug Interactions (42.50) and HIV Drug Interactions (43.00). The DISCERN questions that received the highest mean score across all online resources referred to whether the risks were described for each treatment (4.66), whether the aims were clear (4.58), whether the source achieved those aims (4.58), and whether the website referred to areas of uncertainty (4.58). The DISCERN questions that received the lowest mean score across all online resources assessed whether there was discussion about no treatment being used (1.29) and how treatment choices would affect quality of life (2.00).

Conclusion

This study provides a comprehensive list of online resources containing CAM-specific information. Informed by the appraisal of these resources, this study provides a summarized list of high quality, evidence-based, online resources about CAM and CAM-related adverse effects. This list of recommended resources can thereby serve as a useful reference for clinicians, researchers, and patients.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Boehm K, Raak C, Vollmar HC, Ostermann T. An overview of 45 published database resources for complementary and alternative medicine. Health Inf Libr J. 2010;27(2):93–105. CrossRef
2.
Ng JY, Boon HS, Thompson AK, Whitehead CR. Making sense of “alternative”, “complementary”, “unconventional” and “integrative” medicine: exploring the terms and meanings through a textual analysis. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2016;16:134. CrossRef
3.
Posadzki P, Watson LK, Ernst E. Adverse effects of herbal medicines: an overview of systematic reviews. Clin Med. 2013;13(1):7-12.4. CrossRef
4.
Schmitz SM, Lopez HL, Mackay D, Nguyen H, Miller PE. Serious adverse events reported with dietary supplement use in the United States: a 2.5 year experience. J Diet Suppl. 2020;17(2):227–48. CrossRef
5.
Ekor M. The growing use of herbal medicines: issues relating to adverse reactions and challenges in monitoring safety. Front Pharmacol. 2014;4:177. CrossRef
6.
7.
8.
Allais G, Voghera D, Lorenzo CD, Mana O, Benedetto C. Access to databases in complementary medicine. J Altern Complement Med. 2000;6(3):265–74. CrossRef
9.
Jackson EA. Resources for information on herbal medicinals and dietary supplements. J Herb Pharmacother. 2001;1(2):89–98. CrossRef
10.
Jackson EA, Kanmaz T. An overview of information resources for herbal medicinals and dietary supplements. J Herb Pharmacother. 2001;1(1):35–61. CrossRef
11.
Motl SE, Timpe EM, Robinson M, Corsberg C, Phillips K. Health information web sites by therapeutic category for healthcare professionals. J Pharm Technol . 2004;20(2):106–18. CrossRef
12.
Kiefer D, Shah S, Gardiner P, Wechkin H. Finding information on herbal therapy: a guide to useful sources for clinicians. Altern Ther Health Med. 2001;7(6):74–8. PubMed
13.
Meyer JR, Generali JA, Karpinski JL. Evaluation of herbal–drug interaction data in tertiary resources. Hosp Pharm. 2004;39(2):149–60. CrossRef
14.
Sweet BV, Gay WE, Leady MA, Stumpf JL. Usefulness of herbal and dietary supplement references. Ann Pharmacother. 2003;37(4):494–9. CrossRef
15.
Wootton JC. Directory of databases for research into alternative and complementary medicine. J Altern Complement Med. 1997;3(2):179–90. CrossRef
16.
17.
Charnock D, Shepperd S, Needham G, Gann R. DISCERN: an instrument for judging the quality of written consumer health information on treatment choices. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1999;53(2):105–11. CrossRef
18.
19.
Aveni E, Bauer B, Ramelet AS, Decosterd I, Ballabeni P, Bonvin E, Rodondi PY. Healthcare professionals’ sources of knowledge of complementary medicine in an academic center. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(9):e0184979. CrossRef
20.
Patel SJ, Kemper KJ, Kitzmiller JP. Physician perspectives on education, training, and implementation of complementary and alternative medicine. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2017;8:499–503. CrossRef
21.
Moral-Munoz JA, Carballo-Costa L, Herrera-Viedma E, Cobo MJ. Production trends, collaboration, and main topics of the integrative and complementary oncology research area: a bibliometric analysis. Integr Cancer Ther. 2019;18:1–14. CrossRef
22.
Ng JY, Mooghali M, Munford V. eHealth technologies assisting in identifying potential adverse interactions with complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) or standalone CAM adverse events or side effects: a scoping review. BMC Complement Med Ther. 2020;20:239. CrossRef
23.
24.
Archer M, Proulx J, Shane-McWhorter L, Bray BE, Zeng-Treitler Q. Development of an alert system to detect drug interactions with herbal supplements using medical record data. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2014;2014:249–55. PubMedPubMedCentral
25.
Boddy K, Ernst E. Review of reliable information sources related to integrative oncology. Hematol Oncol Clin N Am. 2008;22(4):619–30. CrossRef
26.
Boehmer S, Karpa K. Evaluating the value of a web-based natural medicine clinical decision tool at an academic medical center. BMC Health Serv Res. 2011;11(1):279. CrossRef
27.
Clauson KA, Polen HH, Peak AS, Marsh WA, DiScala SL. Clinical decision support tools: personal digital assistant versus online dietary supplement databases. Ann Pharmacother. 2008;42(11):1592–9. CrossRef
28.
Faubert G, Lebe D, Bussières JF. A pilot study to compare natural health product–drug interactions in two databases in Canada. Pharm World Sci. 2010;32(2):179–86. CrossRef
29.
Fischer JE, Crowell K, Curtis P. Complementary and alternative medical reference software for personal digital assistants: evidence of clinical applicability. Complement Health Pract Rev. 2005;10(1):57–72. CrossRef
30.
Fitzpatrick RB. Natural standard database. Med Ref Serv Quart. 2010;29(2):154–65. CrossRef
31.
Gregory PJ, Jalloh MA, Abe AM, Hu J, Hein DJ. Characterization of complementary and alternative medicine-related consultations in an academic drug information service. J Pharm Pract. 2016;29(6):539–42. CrossRef
32.
Molassiotis A, Xu M. Quality and safety issues of web-based information about herbal medicines in the treatment of cancer. Complement Ther Med. 2004;12(4):217–27. CrossRef
33.
Spanakis M, Sfakianakis S, Sakkalis V, Spanakis E. PharmActa: empowering patients to avoid clinical significant drug–herb interactions. Medicines. 2019;6(1):26. CrossRef
34.
Sun Y, Shi S, Li Y, Wang Q. Development of quantitative structure-activity relationship models to predict potential nephrotoxic ingredients in traditional Chinese medicines. Food Chem Toxicol. 2019;128:163–70. CrossRef
35.
Tomasulo P. Natural Standard-New integrative medicine database. Med Ref Serv Quart. 2003;22(3):33–8. CrossRef
36.
Walker JB. Evaluation of the ability of seven herbal resources to answer questions about herbal products asked in drug information centers. Pharmacotherapy. 2002;22(12):1611–5. CrossRef
37.
Yap KY, See CS, Kuo EY, Chui WK, Chan A. Utilizing mobile networks for the detection of clinically relevant interactions between chemotherapy regimens and complementary and alternative medicines. J Altern Complement Med. 2012;18(2):165–74. CrossRef
38.
Sbaffi L, Rowley J. Trust and credibility in web-based health information: a review and agenda for future research. J Med Internet Res. 2017;19(6):e218. CrossRef
39.
Vega LC, Montague E, DeHart T. Trust between patients and health websites: a review of the literature and derived outcomes from empirical studies. Health Technol. 2011;1(2–4):71–80. CrossRef
40.
41.
Berland GK, Elliott MN, Morales LS, Algazy JI, Kravitz RL, Broder MS, et al. Health information on the Internet: Accessibility, quality, and readability in english and spanish. JAMA. 2001;285(20):2612–21. CrossRef
42.
Crocco AG, Villasis-Keever M, Jadad AR. Analysis of cases of harm associated with use of health information on the internet. JAMA. 2002;287(21):2869–71. CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Web-based online resources about adverse interactions or side effects associated with complementary and alternative medicine: a systematic review, summarization and quality assessment
Authors
Jeremy Y. Ng
Vanessa Munford
Harmy Thakar
Publication date
01-12-2020
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making / Issue 1/2020
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6947
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-020-01298-5

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 1/2020 Go to the issue

Research article

The role of histogram analysis in diffusion-weighted imaging in the differential diagnosis of benign and malignant breast lesions

Technical advance

Privacy-preserving architecture for providing feedback to clinicians on their clinical performance

Research article

Clinicians perceptions of a telemedicine system: a mixed method study of Makassar City, Indonesia

Research article

Content and system development of a digital patient-provider communication tool to support shared decision making in chronic health care: InvolveMe

Research article

An effective frequency-domain feature of atrial fibrillation based on time–frequency analysis

Research article

The design and development of technology platforms in a developing country healthcare context from an ecosystem perspective