This Article Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 0163278709346816v1 32/4/370    most recent References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Solomon, P. R. Articles by Michalczuk, D. E. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Solomon, P. R. Articles by Michalczuk, D. E. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Toward Establishing Guidelines for Evaluating Cognitive Enhancement With Complementary and Alterative Medicines

Department of Psychology, Program in Neuroscience, Williams College, Williamstown, Massachusetts, psolomon{at}williams.edu, The Memory Clinic, Bennington, Vermont

Diana E. Michalczuk

The Memory Clinic, Bennington, Vermont, Department of Behavioral Medicine, Clinical Psychology Program, Midwestern University, Downers Grove, Illinois

The growing use of complementary and alternative medications (CAM) for cognitive enhancement in both healthy elderly and patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other dementing disorders has led to rapidly growing literature with conflicting results. There are studies that suggest benefit from CAM in both the healthy elderly and dementing patients as well as studies that suggest no benefit for either group. Because of the lack of regulatory oversight (e.g., Food and Drug Administration [FDA], European Medicines Agency [EMeA]), there are currently no generally accepted guidelines to standardize the types of studies that are conducted. Due to the absence of guidelines that set standards for study design, outcomes, and analysis, it is difficult to compare studies with conflicting results. For example, Ginkgo biloba has been shown both to provide benefit and no benefit on cognition in both healthy elderly and patients with AD. Reconciling these divergent studies has been challenging because both sides often use divergent methodologies and designs and widely varying cognitive measures that may or may not be validated in the populations being studied. In this article, the authors suggest a roadmap for establishing guidelines for the evaluation of CAM in cognition. They then apply these guidelines to the conflicting literature on Ginkgo to determine whether they might help resolve the conflicting results.

Key Words: complementary medicines • cognition • guidelines • Ginkgo Biloba

This version was published on December 1, 2009

Evaluation & the Health Professions, Vol. 32, No. 4, 370-392 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/0163278709346816


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?