Next Article in Journal
Use of Oral Prednisolone and a 3-Phase Bone Scintigraphy in Patients with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome Type I
Next Article in Special Issue
Investigating the Temporal Relationships between Symptoms and Nebuliser Adherence in People with Cystic Fibrosis: A Series of N-of-1 Observations
Previous Article in Journal
Do Patients’ Privacy Concerns Influence Their Intention toward Medical Image Exchange Consent in Taiwan?
Previous Article in Special Issue
Protocol: Using Single-Case Experimental Design to Evaluate Whole-Body Dynamic Seating on Activity, Participation, and Quality of Life in Dystonic Cerebral Palsy
Open AccessOpinion

Practice-Based Research in Complementary Medicine: Could N-of-1 Trials Become the New Gold Standard?

1
School of Health and Human Sciences, Southern Cross University, Gold Coast, QLD 4225, Australia
2
School of Health and Human Sciences, Southern Cross University, Lismore, NSW 2480, Australia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Healthcare 2020, 8(1), 15; https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare8010015
Received: 13 December 2019 / Accepted: 7 January 2020 / Published: 8 January 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue N-of-1 Trials in Healthcare)
Complementary medicines and therapies are popular forms of healthcare with a long history of traditional use. Yet, despite increasing consumer demand, there is an ongoing exclusion of complementary medicines from mainstream healthcare systems. A lack of evidence is often cited as justification. Until recently, high-quality evidence of treatment efficacy was defined as findings from well-conducted systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. In a recent and welcome move by the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Practice, however, the N-of-1 trial design has also been elevated to the highest level of evidence for treatment efficacy of an individual, placing this research design on par with the meta-analysis. N-of-1 trial designs are experimental research methods that can be implemented in clinical practice. They incorporate much of the rigor of group clinical trials, but are designed for individual patients. Individualizing treatment interventions and outcomes in research designs is consistent with the movement towards patient-centered care and aligns well with the principles of holism as practiced by naturopaths and many other complementary medicine practitioners. This paper explores whether rigorously designed and conducted N-of-1 trials could become a new ‘gold standard’ for demonstrating treatment efficacy for complementary medicine interventions in individual patients in clinical practice. View Full-Text
Keywords: N-of-1 trials; complementary medicine; levels of evidence; practice-based research; naturopathic medicine N-of-1 trials; complementary medicine; levels of evidence; practice-based research; naturopathic medicine
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Bradbury, J.; Avila, C.; Grace, S. Practice-Based Research in Complementary Medicine: Could N-of-1 Trials Become the New Gold Standard? Healthcare 2020, 8, 15.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop