MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3080467533 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v12n10p122

Perception of Conventional Medicine and Herbal Medicine Usage Amongst Diabetic Patients: A Qualitative Study in Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia

2020· article· en· W3080467533 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Norbaidurah Ithnain, Albeny Joslyn Panting, Rosnani Kassim, Nadia Amirudin, Manimaran Krishnan

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNatural Antidiabetic Agents Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKementerian Kesihatan Malaysia
KeywordsMedicineAlternative medicineTraditional medicineNonprobability samplingQualitative researchDiabetes mellitusFamily medicineConventional medicinePerceptionPopulationEnvironmental healthPsychologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The concomitant intake of herbal medicine and conventional medicine amongst patients is steadily increasing worldwide. However, concerns have been raised regarding potential adverse effects and drug interactions when consuming both medications together. Therefore, this work aimed to comprehending the perception of Type 2 Diabetic Mellitus (T2DM) patients on conventional medicine and the manner of its use with herbal medicine in managing diabetes mellitus. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted among 28 diabetic patients in four government clinics under the jurisdiction of the state of Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia. Purposive sampling was employed to recruit informants who consumed herbal medicine alongside their prescribed conventional medicine. This study employed semi-structured interviews, which were all digitally recorded, transcribed, and analysed thematically. RESULTS: This study found that most of the patients perceived the negative side effects of conventional medicine, which led them to consider incorporating herbal medicine in treating diabetes. Such perception was influenced by the personal experiences of their family members and friends. A majority of the informants utilised herbal medicine as a complementary consumption to conventional medicine as opposed to implementing it as an alternative. However, they would alter the dosage and intake time of conventional medicine for several reasons, such as to complement their herbal medicine intake, being fed-up with conventional medicine, and reduce the risk of its side effects. Lastly, this study revealed that some of the patients noted their intention to discontinue conventional medicine, while some even tried to quit. CONCLUSIONS: A complete understanding of patient’s perceptions regarding conventional medicine and its usage with herbal medicine will aid healthcare providers to deliver education on the importance of conventional medicine usage compliance. Additionally, people should be aware that its combination with herbal medicine when consumed may present adverse effects and subsequently cause serious health problems.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.533

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.346 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health ScienceSame topicNatural Antidiabetic Agents StudiesFrench-language works237,207