Timing and Motivations for Alternative Cancer Therapy: Insights from a Crowdfunding Platform (Preprint)

Conspiracy beliefs and intention to use conventional, complementary and alternative medicines: Two vignette studies

OBJECTIVE

Conspiracy beliefs (CBs) can have substantial consequences on health behaviours by influencing both conventional and non-conventional medicine uptake. They can target powerful groups (i.e. upward CBs) or powerless groups (i.e. downward CBs). Considering their repercussions in oncology, it appears useful to understand how CBs are related to the intentions to use conventional, complementary and alternative medicines (CAM).

DESIGN AND METHODS

This paper includes two pre-registered online correlational studies on a general French population (Study 1 N = 248, recruited on social media Mage = 40.07, SDage = 14.78; 205 women, 41 men and 2 non-binaries; Study 2 N = 313, recruited on social media and Prolific, Mage = 28.91, SDage = 9.60; 154 women, 149 men and 10 non-binaries). We investigated the links between generic and chemotherapy-related CBs and intentions to use conventional, complementary and alternative medicines. Study 2 consisted of a conceptual replication of Study 1, considering the orientation of CBs.

RESULTS

Generic CBs and chemotherapy-related CBs appear strongly and positively correlated, negatively correlated with intentions to take conventional medicine and positively with intentions to take CAM. The link between generic CBs and medication intention is fully mediated by chemotherapy-related CBs. When distinguished, upward CBs are a stronger predictor of chemotherapy-related CBs than downward CBs.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that intentions to use medicine are strongly associated with CBs. This has several important implications for further research and practice, notably on the presence and effects of CBs on medication behaviours in cancer patients.

Multi-Institutional Analysis of Cancer Patient Exposure, Perceptions, and Trust in Information Sources Regarding Complementary and Alternative Medicine

PURPOSE

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) use during cancer treatment is controversial. We aim to evaluate contemporary CAM use, patient perceptions and attitudes, and trust in various sources of information regarding CAM.

METHODS

A multi-institutional questionnaire was distributed to patients receiving cancer treatment. Collected information included respondents' clinical and demographic characteristics, rates of CAM exposure/use, information sources regarding CAM, and trust in each information source. Comparisons between CAM users and nonusers were performed with chi-squared tests and one-way analysis of variance. Multivariable logistic regression models for trust in physician and nonphysician sources of information regarding CAM were evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 749 respondents, the most common goals of CAM use were management of symptoms (42.2%) and treatment of cancer (30.4%). Most CAM users learned of CAM from nonphysician sources. Of CAM users, 27% reported not discussing CAM with their treating oncologists. Overall trust in physicians was high in both CAM users and nonusers. The only predictor of trust in physician sources of information was income >$100,000 in US dollars per year. Likelihood of trust in nonphysician sources of information was higher in females and lower in those with graduate degrees.

CONCLUSION

A large proportion of patients with cancer are using CAM, some with the goal of treating their cancer. Although patients are primarily exposed to CAM through nonphysician sources of information, trust in physicians remains high. More research is needed to improve patient-clinician communication regarding CAM use.

The suggestive nature of words. Media coverage of homeopathy, acupuncture, reiki and Bach flower remedies in Spanish press 2011-2016

The maxim of proponents of pseudoscience is to spread ignorance through false perceptions of its scientific status. One of its most attractive - and simultaneously harmful - manifestations is complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). Despite the scientific evidence against them, CAM has taken hold in today's society as a therapeutic model for a growing segment of the population. We analysed 379 articles on homeopathy, acupuncture, reiki and Bach flower remedies published in mainstream Spanish newspapers (El País, El Mundo, La Vanguardia, El Periódico and ABC) for the period 2011-2016, finding that disinformation is participated in actively by the Spanish press. CAM content was detected in these newspapers, together with a lack of an editorial perspective. In most of the cases, the uncritical articles were found in the interpretive genre and the society section. We also characterized the pseudoscientific discourse aimed at the public, finding that it is irrational and fraudulent in sowing fear and distrust regarding science. On the basis of theories invalidated by the scientific method and on appeals to the emotions, pseudoscience not only threatens scientific knowledge, but directly undermines public health by encouraging the abandonment of conventional medicine. In order to remedy this situation, better scientific training, informative screening and editorial commitment is urgently needed in the Spanish press.

Clinician Communication With Patients About Cancer Misinformation: A Qualitative Study

PURPOSE

Clinicians regularly face conversations about information that patients have found online. Given the prevalence of misinformation, these conversations can include cancer-related misinformation, which is often harmful. Clinicians are in a key position as trusted sources of information to educate patients. However, there is no research on clinician-patient conversations about cancer-related misinformation. As a first step, the objective of this study was to describe how cancer clinicians report communicating with patients about online cancer misinformation.

METHODS

We used convenience and snowball sampling to contact 59 cancer clinicians by e-mail. Contacted clinicians predominately worked at academic centers across the United States. Clinicians who agreed participated in semistructured interviews about communication in health care. For this study, we focused specifically on clinicians' experiences discussing online cancer-related misinformation with patients. We conducted a thematic analysis using a constant comparative approach to identify how clinicians address misinformation during clinical visits.

RESULTS

Twenty-one cancer clinicians participated in the study. Nineteen were physicians, one was a physician assistant, and one was a nurse practitioner. The majority (62%) were female. We identified four themes that describe how cancer clinicians address misinformation: (1) work to understand the misinformation; (2) correct misinformation through education; (3) advise about future online searches, and (4) preserve the clinician-patient relationship.

CONCLUSION

Our study identified four strategies that clinicians use to address online cancer-related misinformation with their patients. These findings provide a foundation for future research, allowing us to test these strategies in larger samples to examine their effectiveness.