Hence,“ the method of EBM and the knowledge gained from population-based studies may not be the best way to assess certain CAM practices” (Tonelli & Callahan 2001, p.1213) which take into consideration illness and healing within the context of a particular individual only. Currently, however, the methods of developing knowledge within CAM have limitations, are subject to bias and different interpretations. It is essential that CAM should develop a rigorous alternative epistemic framework of knowledge and method based on its philosophy if it hopes to be accepted as a valid medical discipline by orthodox practitioners. According to Long (2002), monitoring the achievement of desired outcomes of research is essential. The effects of a CAM intervention are of three types: those arising from the philosophy and practice of health and healing, factors emerging from the relationship between the patient and the practitioner, and the factors resulting from the interventions used to enhance the healing process. This delineation of effects is relevant to conventional medicine also. For the full effect of a CAM discipline to be recognized, the measurement of all three types of outcomes is required. Complementary and Alternative Medicine.
Barry, C.A. (2006). The role of evidence in alternative medicine: Contrasting biomedical
and anthropological approaches. Social Sciences & Medicine, 62: pp.2646-2657.
Caspi, O., Koithan, M. & Criddle, M.W. (2004). Alternative medicine or “alternative”
patients: A qualitative study of patient-oriented decision-making processes with
respect to complementary and alternative medicine. Medical Decision Making, 24:
Chaitow, L. (2008). Naturopathic physical medicine: Theory and practice for manual
therapists and naturopaths. New York: Elsevier Health Sciences.
Churchill, W. (January 1999). Implications of evidence based medicine for
complementary and alternative medicine. Journal of Chinese Medicine, 59: pp.32-35.
Coulter, I.D. & Willis, E.M. (2004). The rise and rise of complementary and alternative
medicine: A sociological perspective. Medical Journal of Australia, 180: pp.587-589.
Feinstein, A.R. & Horwitz, R.I. (1997). Problems in the “evidence” of “evidence-based
medicine”. American Journal of Medicine, 103: pp.529-535.
Gatchel, R.J. & Maddrey, A.M. (1998). Clinical outcome research in complementary and
alternative medicine: An overview of experimental design and analysis. Alternative
Therapies in Health and Medicine, 4: pp.36-42.
Hadley, J., Hassan, I. & Khan, K.S. (2008). Knowledge and beliefs concerning evidence
based practice amongst complementary and alternative medicine health care
practitioners and allied health care professionals: A questionnaire survey. BMC
Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 8(45): pp.1-7.
Hammerschlag, R. & Zwickey, H. (2006). Evidence-based complementary and
alternative medicines: Back to basics. The Journal of Alternative and
Complementary Medicine, 12(4): pp.349-350.
Long, A.F. (2002). Outcome measurement in complementary and alternative medicine:
Unpicking the effects. The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 8(6):
Sackett, D.L., Rosenberg, W.M., Gray, J.A., Haynes, R.B. & Richardson, W.S. (1996).
Evidence-based medicine: What it is and what it isn’t. British Medical Journal, 312:
Tonelli, M.R. & Callahan, T.C. (2001). Why alternative medicine cannot be evidence-
based. Academic Medicine, 76(12): pp.1213-1220.
Tovey, P., Esthope, G. & Adams, J. (2004). The mainstreaming of complementary and
alternative medicine: Studies in social context. New York: Routledge.
Trinder, L. & Reynolds, S. (2000). Evidence-based practice: A critical appraisal. Edition
5, Massachusetts: Wiley-Blackwell.
Vickers, A.J. (2001). Message to complementary and alternative medicine: Evidence is
a better friend than power. Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 1(1): pp.1-3.
Please type your essay title, choose your document type, enter your email and we send you essay samples