Examination of the Scope and Quantity of Published Osteopathic Research (1999-2000) Identified Using the Search Words Osteopath, Osteopathy and Osteopathic

Phillips, AP; Cobbin, DM

Examination of the Scope and Quantity of Published Osteopathic Research (1999-2000) Identified Using the Search Words Osteopath, Osteopathy and Osteopathic

Phillips, AP Cobbin, DM

Permalink

Publisher:: AOMR Inc.
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Journal of Osteopathic Medicine, 2001, 4 (2), pp. 56 - 61
Issue Date:: 2001-01

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	2004004388OK.pdf		670.66 kB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Phillips, AP	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Cobbin, DM	en_US
dc.date.issued	2001-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Journal of Osteopathic Medicine, 2001, 4 (2), pp. 56 - 61	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	1443-8461	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/15540
dc.description.abstract	Objective: To examine the scope and standard of osteopathic research published in English during the 12 month period, commencing February 1999. Method: Online search of relevant data bases (Medline, Health Star, Biological Abstracts, CINAHL, Current Contents) using search words osteopath, osteopathy, osteopathic to locate original research articles. All articles were examined in relation to standard and completeness of methodology. Main Findings: Thirteen articles met the inclusion criteria; seven were published in osteopathic journals and six in international journals of medicine or physiotherapy. All five that reported experimental or clinical research into osteopathy employed appropriate standards of scientific rigour and methodology. The remaining eight studies were surveys from the United States of America (USA). Four highlighted the different role of osteopaths in the USA, where they are part of the medical fraternity, performing many of the functions of a general practitioner. Conclusion: The limited research published during the 12 month period in journals accessible on electronic databases is likely in part to reflect to the recency of expansion of undergraduate and postgraduate programs in osteopathy in universities. Attention is drawn to possible problems for identifying published osteopathic research, stemming from the failure of authors to include osteopathic terms in text, title and key word listing. It is recommended that researchers are made aware of the need to include osteopathic key words as recognition of its status as a unique health discipline.	en_US
dc.publisher	AOMR Inc.	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Journal of Osteopathic Medicine	en_US
dc.subject.classification	Orthopedics	en_US
dc.title	Examination of the Scope and Quantity of Published Osteopathic Research (1999-2000) Identified Using the Search Words Osteopath, Osteopathy and Osteopathic	en_US
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	2	en_US
utslib.citation.volume	4	en_US
utslib.for	1104 Complementary and Alternative Medicine	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Science
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Science/School of Life Sciences
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access
pubs.consider-herdc	true	en_US
pubs.issue	2	en_US
pubs.volume	4	en_US

Abstract:

Objective: To examine the scope and standard of osteopathic research published in English during the 12 month period, commencing February 1999. Method: Online search of relevant data bases (Medline, Health Star, Biological Abstracts, CINAHL, Current Contents) using search words osteopath, osteopathy, osteopathic to locate original research articles. All articles were examined in relation to standard and completeness of methodology. Main Findings: Thirteen articles met the inclusion criteria; seven were published in osteopathic journals and six in international journals of medicine or physiotherapy. All five that reported experimental or clinical research into osteopathy employed appropriate standards of scientific rigour and methodology. The remaining eight studies were surveys from the United States of America (USA). Four highlighted the different role of osteopaths in the USA, where they are part of the medical fraternity, performing many of the functions of a general practitioner. Conclusion: The limited research published during the 12 month period in journals accessible on electronic databases is likely in part to reflect to the recency of expansion of undergraduate and postgraduate programs in osteopathy in universities. Attention is drawn to possible problems for identifying published osteopathic research, stemming from the failure of authors to include osteopathic terms in text, title and key word listing. It is recommended that researchers are made aware of the need to include osteopathic key words as recognition of its status as a unique health discipline.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/15540