Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Complementary medicine: where is the evidence?

Edzard Ernst1

  • 1Complementary Medicine, Peninsula Medical School, Universities of Exeter and Plymouth, 25 Victoria Park Road, Exeter EX2 4NT, United Kingdom. Edzard.Ernst@pms.ac.uk

The Journal of Family Practice
|August 6, 2003
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Authoritarian attitudes and the perceived scientific legitimacy of anthroposophic medicine: A survey of attitudes on complementary and alternative medicine in Austria.

PloS one·2026
Same author

Trials and tribulations of responsible people trying to uphold scientific standards.

Research integrity and peer review·2026
Same author

WHO's category mistake.

Lancet (London, England)·2025
Same author

Spinal manipulations for migraine: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

Systematic reviews·2024
Same author

Is Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment Clinically Superior to Sham or Placebo for Patients with Neck or Low-Back Pain? A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis.

Diseases (Basel, Switzerland)·2024
Same author

Is Craniosacral Therapy Effective? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland)·2024

Systematic reviews show herbal medicines are well-researched complementary therapies with positive evidence. However, research into serious risks of complementary medicine, such as herb toxicity or chiropractic manipulation injuries, is limited.

Area of Science:

  • Complementary and Alternative Medicine
  • Evidence-Based Practice

Background:

  • Herbal medicines are frequently reviewed within complementary therapies.
  • Systematic reviews are a key method for evaluating complementary medicine efficacy and safety.
  • Concerns exist regarding potential serious risks associated with some complementary therapies.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To assess the landscape of systematic reviews for complementary medicine.
  • To identify areas with the most positive evidence.
  • To highlight the limited research on serious risks in complementary medicine.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of systematic reviews available in the Cochrane Library.
  • Categorization of reviews by complementary therapy type.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Herbal medicines have the highest number of systematic reviews (20).
  • Positive evidence is most frequently found in reviews of herbal medicines.
  • Research on serious risks, including herb toxicity and chiropractic manipulation injuries, is scarce.

Conclusions:

  • Herbal medicine research is relatively robust within complementary therapies.
  • Further investigation into the safety and potential risks of complementary medicine is warranted.
  • The Cochrane Library contains 34 systematic reviews across various complementary modalities.