MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087050913 · doi:10.1089/acm.2009.0381

Provider Support in Complementary and Alternative Medicine: Exploring the Role of Patient Empowerment

2010· article· en· W2087050913 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicComplementary and Alternative Medicine Studies
Canadian institutionsBishop's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConfirmatory factor analysisStructural equation modelingCronbach's alphaEmpowermentClinical psychologyScale (ratio)Family medicinePsychometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The quality of the patient-provider relationship is well-recognized as having a key role in therapeutic outcomes irrespective of treatment effects. Yet there is a lack of scales to assess aspects of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) provider support. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to develop and psychometrically evaluate scales to measure patients' perceptions of provider support, patient-centered care, and empowerment as predictors of health outcomes. METHODS: Based on five focus groups with CAM clients, we developed the following three scales: Perceived Provider Support, Patient-Centered Care (PCC), and Empowerment. The scales were cognitively tested with 6 CAM users and then pilot-tested with 216 respondents. Confirmatory factor analyses, item response theory analyses, and Cronbach's alphas were conducted to evaluate their psychometric properties. Bootstrapping techniques and structural equation modeling were used to evaluate Empowerment as a mediator of the relationship of Perceived Provider Support and PCC with symptom relief. RESULTS: All three scales demonstrated high internal consistency with Cronbach's alphas of 0.85 to 0.90 and confirmatory factor analyses supported a one-factor solution for each scale. Controlling for demographics, presenting problem, and main CAM provider used in the past 12 months, each of the scales had a positive and significant relationship with overall symptom relief for the patient's primary presenting problem (p < .01). Bootstrapped Sobel tests were significant (p < .01), supporting the role of empowerment as a mediator of the impact of PCC and provider support on symptom relief. A structural equation model combining PCC and provider support into a single latent variable representing quality of patient-provider interactions and including empowerment as a mediator fit well. CONCLUSIONS: From a holistic perspective, CAM treatment effects can arise in part from sources related to the therapeutic relationship, as well as the philosophy of healing and specific techniques designed to reduce symptoms. This analysis provides conceptual support for this perspective, a means to evaluate aspects of the therapeutic relationship and to measure its impact on outcomes of CAM treatment across conditions and therapies.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.234
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it