Understanding The Role Of Scientific Evidence In Consumer Evaluation Of Natural Health Products For Osteoarthritis An Application Of The Means End Chain Approach. - Info and Reading Options

The Internet Archive:

This article is from <a href="//archive.org/search.php?query=journaltitle%3A%28BMC%20Complementary%20and%20Alternative%20Medicine%29" rel="ugc nofollow">BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine</a>, <a href="//archive.org/search.php?query=journaltitle%3A%28BMC%20Complementary%20and%20Alternative%20Medicine%29%20AND%20volume%3A%2812%29" rel="ugc nofollow">volume 12</a>.<h2>Abstract</h2>Background: Over 30% of individuals use natural health products (NHPs) for osteoarthritis-related pain. The Deficit Model for the Public Understanding of Science suggests that if individuals are given more information (especially about scientific evidence) they will make better health-related decisions. In contrast, the Contextual Model argues that scientific evidence is one of many factors that explain how consumers make health-related decisions. The primary objective was to investigate how the level of scientific evidence supporting the efficacy of NHPs impacts consumer decision-making in the self-selection of NHPs by individuals with osteoarthritis. Methods: The means-end chain approach to product evaluation was used to compare laddering interviews with two groups of community-dwelling Canadian seniors who had used NHPs to treat their osteoarthritis. Group 1 (n=13) had used only NHPs (glucosamine and/or chondroitin) with “high” scientific evidence of efficacy. Group 2 (n=12) had used NHPs (methylsulfonylmethane (MSM) and/or bromelain) with little or no scientific evidence supporting efficacy. Content analysis and generation of hierarchical value maps facilitated the identification of similarities and differences between the two groups. Results: The dominant decision-making chains for participants in the two scientific evidence categories were similar. Scientific evidence was an important decision-making factor but not as important as the advice from health care providers, friends and family. Most participants learned about scientific evidence via indirect sources from health care providers and the media. Conclusions: The Contextual Model of the public understanding of science helps to explain why our participants believed scientific evidence is not the most important factor in their decision to use NHPs to help manage their osteoarthritis.

Search for “Understanding The Role Of Scientific Evidence In Consumer Evaluation Of Natural Health Products For Osteoarthritis An Application Of The Means End Chain Approach.” downloads:

Visit our Downloads Search page to see if downloads are available.

Find “Understanding The Role Of Scientific Evidence In Consumer Evaluation Of Natural Health Products For Osteoarthritis An Application Of The Means End Chain Approach.” in Libraries Near You:

Read or borrow “Understanding The Role Of Scientific Evidence In Consumer Evaluation Of Natural Health Products For Osteoarthritis An Application Of The Means End Chain Approach.” from your local library.

• The WorldCat Libraries Catalog: Find a copy of “Understanding The Role Of Scientific Evidence In Consumer Evaluation Of Natural Health Products For Osteoarthritis An Application Of The Means End Chain Approach.” at a library near you.