Evaluation of Trends in the Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in Health Centers in Khorramabad (West of Iran)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To determine the use of most popular forms of complementary and alternative medicine(CAM), sociodemographic characteristics of CAM users, and communication between CAM users and their physicians by adult Iranian in Khorramabad city. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was carried out on clients who were at least 15 years in age referring to health centers and hospitals in Khorramabad town in 2014. A multi-part questionnaire was used to gather information. The demographic data and details regarding usage (number of times and underlying reasons) of different kinds of complementary and traditional medicine in the past were gathered using a questionnaire. RESULTS: In this study 790 subjects were surveyed using the questionnaire. The mean age of the participant was 38.9 years. 79.8% of the subjects had used at least one of the methods of complementary medicine. Among the participants, 58.2% had used at least one of the complementary medicines in the previous year. Herbal medicine and prayers treatment had the highest use with 69.2% and 37.2%, respectively. Concerns of the side effects of medical therapy, beliefs in less risky being and fewer side effects of complementary medicine, Dissatisfaction of General Practitioners, the increase of being-well feelings in physical conditions, and were among the most important reasons of inclination towards such treatment methods. CONCLUSION: The analysis of using complementary medicine among people is the first step for planning proper use of the beneficial methods of complementary medicine and the prevention of inefficient and harmful methods in this respect.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".