Integrative Cancer Therapies

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (4)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Verhoef, M. J.
Right arrow Articles by Fønnebø, V.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Verhoef, M. J.
Right arrow Articles by Fønnebø, V.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Integrative Cancer Therapies, Vol. 5, No. 4, 287-292 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/1534735406295041

A Whole Systems Research Approach to Cancer Care: Why Do We Need It and How Do We Get Started?

Marja J. Verhoef, PhD

Laura C. Vanderheyden, BSc

Department of Community Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Calgary, Canada

Vinjar Fønnebø, MD, PhD

National Research Center in Complementary and Alternative Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tromsø, Norway

Because cancer care is presently developing into a complicated network of interventions delivered at different times and places with different intentions, there is a need to consider whether the current research approaches in clinical cancer care adequately cover the ongoing treatment choices and combinations. Researchers in complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) are proposing whole systems research as an additional research approach for modern systems of care, whether they include complementary and alternative medicine or not. The current status of whole systems research methodology development is mainly theoretical. Necessary components of the methodology include focus on interventions, context, process, outcomes, and philosophy. Further development should be based on observational studies using both qualitative and quantitative approaches, often combined. Only when modern healthseeking systems of treatment behaviors are thoroughly understood should fine-tuning of hypothesis-testing research methods be continued.

Key Words: whole systems research • research design • cancer • complementary therapies

References

  • Molassiotis A, Fernadez-Ortega P, Pud D, et al. Use of complementary and alternative medicine in cancer patients: a European survey. Ann Oncol. 2005; 16:655-663.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Nagel G, Hoyer H, Katenkamp D. Use of complementary and alternative medicine by patients with breast cancer: observations from a health-care survey. Support Care Cancer. 2004;12: 789-796.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Navo MA, Phan J, Vaughan C, et al. An assessment of the utilization of complementary and alternative medication in women with gynecologic or breast malignancies. J Clin Oncol. 2004; 22(4): 671-677.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Boon H, Stewart M, Kennard MA, et al. Use of complementary/alternative medicine by breast cancer survivors in Ontario: prevalence and perceptions. J Clin Oncol. 2000; 18:2515-2521.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Verhoef MJ, Balneaves LG, Boon HS, Vroegindewey A. Reasons for and characteristics associated with complementary and alternative medicine use among adult cancer patients: a systematic review. Integr Cancer Ther. 2005; 4:274-286.[Abstract]
  • Cunningham A. Can the mind heal cancer: a clinician-scientist examines the evidence. Toronto, Canada: Alistair J. Cunningham; 2005.
  • Thorne SE, Bultz BD, Baile WF. Is there a cost to poor communication in cancer care? A critical review of the literature. Psychooncology. 2005; 14:875-884.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Smedslund G, Inger Ringdal G. Meta-analysis of the effects of psychosocial interventions on survival time in cancer patients. J Psychosom Res. 2004; 57:123-131.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Carver CS, Smith RG, Antoni MH, Petronis VM, Weiss S. Optimistic personality and psychosocial well-being during treatment predict psychosocial well-being among long-term survivors of breast cancer. Health Psychol. 2005; 24:508-516.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Ritenbaugh C. Guiding concepts for whole systems research. Whole systems research in cancer care—report of meeting in Tromsø (Sommaroy), 14-16 September 2005. Complement Ther Med. 2006;14:161-161.
  • Verhoef MJ, Lewith G, Ritenbaugh C, Boon H, Fleishman S, Leis A. Complementary and alternative medicine whole systems research: beyond identification of inadequacies of the RCT. Complement Ther Med. 2005; 13:206-212.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Ritenbaugh C, Verhoef M, Fleishman S, Boon H, Leis A. Whole systems research: a discipline for studying complementary and alternative medicine. Altern Ther Health Med. 2003; 9:32-36.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Fønnebø V. Developing a theoretical framework for complementary and alternative medicine research. In: Whole systems research in cancer care—report of meeting in Tromsø (Sommaroy), 14-16 September 2005. Complement Ther Med. 2006; 14:159-160.
  • Hawe P, Shiell, A, Riley T. Complex interventions: how "out of control" can a randomised controlled trial be. BMJ. 2004; 328:1561-1563.[Free Full Text]
  • Sidani S, Epstein DR, Moritz P. An alternative paradigm for clinical nursing research: an exemplar. Res Nurs Health. 2003; 26:244-255.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Sidani S, Doran DM, Mitchell PH. A theory-driven approach to evaluating quality of nursing care. J Nurs Scholarsh. 2004; 36(1): 60-65.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Medical Research Council. A framework for the development and evaluation of RCTs for complex interventions to improve health. London, UK: Medical Research Council; 2000.
  • Temoshok LR. Rethinking research on psychosocial interventions in biopsychosocial oncology: an essay written in honor of the scholarly contributions of Bernard H. Fox. Psychooncology. 2004; 13:460-467.[CrossRef]
  • Rychetnik L, Frommer M, Hawe P, Shiell A. Criteria for evaluating evidence on public health interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2002; 56:119-127.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Lewith G, Walach H, Jonas WB. Balanced research strategies for complementary and alternative medicine. In: Clinical research in complementary therapies: principles, problems and solutions. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone. 2002; 3-27.
  • Cassidy CM. Unraveling the ball of string: reality, paradigms, and the study of alternative medicine. Advances. 1994; 10:5-31.
  • Mulkins AL, Verhoef MJ. Supporting the transformative process: experiences of cancer patients receiving integrative care. Integr Cancer Ther. 2004; 3:230-237.[Abstract]
  • Bell IR, Koithan M, Gorman MM, Baldwin CM. Homeopathic practitioner views of changes in patients undergoing constitutional treatment for chronic disease. J Altern Comp Med. 2003; 9:39-50.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Stibich M, Wissow L. Meaning shift: findings from wellness acupuncture. Altern Ther Health Med. 2006; 12:42-48.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Paterson C. Measuring outcomes in primary care: a patient generated measure, MYMOP, compared with the SF-36 health survey. Br Med J. 1996; 312:1016-1020.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Becker H, Stuifbergen A, Rogers S, Timmerman G. Goal attainment scaling to measure individual change in intervention studies. Nurs Res. 2000; 49:176-180.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Bell IR, Cunningham V, Caspi O, Meek P, Ferro L. Development and validation of a new global well-being outcomes rating scale for integrative medicine research. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2004;15:1-1.[CrossRef]
  • Verhoef MJ, Vanderheyden L. Whole systems research development in North America and Europe: challenges and opportunities. In: Whole systems research in cancer care— report of meeting in Tromsø (Sommaroy), 14-16 September 2005. Complement Ther Med. 2006;14:158-158.

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?



This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (4)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Verhoef, M. J.
Right arrow Articles by Fønnebø, V.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Verhoef, M. J.
Right arrow Articles by Fønnebø, V.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?