எங்கள் குழு ஒவ்வொரு ஆண்டும் அமெரிக்கா, ஐரோப்பா மற்றும் ஆசியா முழுவதும் 1000 அறிவியல் சங்கங்களின் ஆதரவுடன் 3000+ உலகளாவிய மாநாட்டுத் தொடர் நிகழ்வுகளை ஏற்பாடு செய்து 700+ திறந்த அணுகல் இதழ்களை வெளியிடுகிறது, இதில் 50000 க்கும் மேற்பட்ட தலைசிறந்த ஆளுமைகள், புகழ்பெற்ற விஞ்ஞானிகள் ஆசிரியர் குழு உறுப்பினர்களாக உள்ளனர்.
அதிக வாசகர்கள் மற்றும் மேற்கோள்களைப் பெறும் திறந்த அணுகல் இதழ்கள்
700 இதழ்கள் மற்றும் 15,000,000 வாசகர்கள் ஒவ்வொரு பத்திரிகையும் 25,000+ வாசகர்களைப் பெறுகிறது
Keturah R. Faurot, Amanda C. Filipelli, Charles Poole, Paula M. Gardiner
Background: The prevalence of botanical supplement use among Hispanics/Latinos in the United States varies widely, thwarting efforts to understand patterns of use in these rapidly growing populations. In this systematic review of the literature, we present an analysis of patterns of botanical supplement use across available studies including Hispanics/Latinos in the United States, 1998-2011.
Methods: Search strategies included CINAHL, EMBASE, Global Health, CAB Abstracts, AMED and Medline resulting in 33 studies reporting botanical supplement prevalence among Hispanic/Latino adults, limiting studies to those with similar outcomes and Hispanic/Latino sample ≥1%.
Results: Median prevalence of botanical supplement use among Hispanics/Latinos varied from 12% for ≤30 days of use to 27% for 6-12 months of use and 45% for 2+ years of use. Variation in prevalence of botanical use among Hispanics/Latinos was largely dependent on study design factors, particularly sampling strategy and target population. Patterns associated with higher median prevalence included regional (42%, 95% CI: 35, 57%) vs. national (15%; 8, 22%) samples, convenience (45%; 35, 63%) vs. probability sampling (21%; 10, 42%), and majority Hispanic/Latino (45%; 32, 67%) vs. majority non-Hispanic/ Latino (21%; 15, 42%) samples. Studies targeting Hispanic/Latino populations with botanical assessments specific to these populations resulted in higher prevalence estimates (49% vs. 18%). The most common botanicals reported by Hispanics/ Latinos across studies were chamomile, aloe, and garlic.
Conclusions: Although studies with probability sampling are less affected by selection bias, most target the general US population and exclude botanical supplements common among Hispanic/Latino populations. Improved estimates of botanical supplement use among Hispanics/Latinos require culturally-relevant assessment instruments and strategies. Assessments of botanical supplement use in other ethnic populations, e.g., among immigrants from Asian countries, are also likely to suffer from information bias.