Dietary Supplement Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine Use in Pediatric Autism: Physician Based Perception, Knowledge and Involvement
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a group of heterogeneous chronic neurodevelopmental disorders characterized by qualitative impairments in social interaction, communication, and repetitive stereotyped patterns of behavior, and is quoted as being the fastest growing developmental disorder in the United States affecting an estimated 1 in 45 children. In addition to conventional treatment options, some parents of children with autism seek out supplement based complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) to treat autistic symptoms. Purpose This study describes the use of CAM in children between the ages of 4 to 14 years with and without ASD. Data from this study aims to: (1) provide a more clear understanding of the prevalence and types of supplement therapies used; (2) increase awareness of the use of CAM therapies in children to provide better integrative care; (3) inform public health professionals of common and potentially harmful CAM therapies in ASD to guide public initiatives; and (4) assess patient‐physician communication and interactions surrounding CAM use. Methodology This population‐based, survey sample evaluated children with and without ASD (4 to 14 years) in regards to supplement use. Participants were recruited from educational and physical activity programs to complete a questionnaire. Primary caregivers provided information on current CAM use and their perceived physician knowledge of CAM administration. Data evaluates the proportion of children that use supplement therapies, the types of supplements used, reasons for use, perceived safety, and demographic factors associated with use (e.g. income, parental education, severity of disorder). In a second, follow‐up survey, physicians of children were asked to answer a questionnaire on CAM use in their patients‐‐. In particular, it examined the relationship between the parent and child's physician in terms of perceived parental and physician comfort in discussing supplements, parental disclosure of supplements, and physician knowledge of autism and supplements. Results Preliminary results indicate that 50% of children with ASD are taking supplements, compared to only 33% of children without ASD. The most common supplement used was a multivitamin (46%), the use of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs), B vitamins, and dietary fiber use were also found. Health care professionals were the most common information source regarding supplements and the majority of parents reported disclosing all supplement use to their child's primary health provider. All parents, both in the autism and control group, indicated that they perceived supplements as being safe. In conclusion, the use of supplement therapies in children with ASD is common and highlights the need for further research with respect to treatment communication, knowledge, and education. Support or Funding Information Alberta Children's Hospital Research Institute. This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2018 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal .
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».