Useful or not? The discussion of traditional Chinese medicine to treat COVID-19 on a Chinese social networking site.

IF 7.1 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH BMJ Global Health Pub Date : 2024-06-10 DOI:10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014398
Di Wang, Jiahui Lu, Jiaming Zhou, Vincent Kam Wai Wong
{"title":"Useful or not? The discussion of traditional Chinese medicine to treat COVID-19 on a Chinese social networking site.","authors":"Di Wang, Jiahui Lu, Jiaming Zhou, Vincent Kam Wai Wong","doi":"10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014398","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The use of traditional medicine is a global phenomenon, and the WHO advocated its appropriate integration into modern healthcare systems. However, there is a hot debate about the legitimacy of traditional medicine among the general public. Here, we investigated the debate in the Chinese digital context by analysing 1954 responses related to 100 questions about traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) treatment against COVID-19 on the Zhihu platform. Attitude function theory was applied to understand the reasons underlying public attitudes.Results showed that Zhihu users generally held a supportive attitude toward TCM. Their attitudes mainly came from their own experience and traditional media. The general users were more negative while medical professionals were more positive toward TCM. Ego defence (eg, derogating evidence sources) was used the most to support attitudes, followed by value expression (eg, believing in science). Supporters showed fewer expressions of faith (eg, the use of TCM is a kind of faith), politics (eg, supporting TCM is about politics) and science value (eg, TCM is a field of science), fewer ego defence, more patriotism and cultural confidence expressions (eg, TCM is a cultural pride) and more knowledge explanation (eg, TCM accelerates the metabolism of phlegm) than expected. Opposers showed fewer utilitarian and knowledge functions, fewer expressions of patriotism and more expressions of faith, politics and economics, but more ego defence functions than expected. Opposing posts were more likely to attract engagement than supporting and neutral posts. Posts that mentioned attitude functions generally attracted more engagement.Our findings indicate that TCM debate in modern China is not only relevant to medical science and health, but also rooted deeply in cultural ideology, politics and economics. The findings can provide global insights into the development of proactive policies and action plans that will help the integration of traditional medicine into modern healthcare systems.</p>","PeriodicalId":9137,"journal":{"name":"BMJ Global Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11168149/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ Global Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014398","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The use of traditional medicine is a global phenomenon, and the WHO advocated its appropriate integration into modern healthcare systems. However, there is a hot debate about the legitimacy of traditional medicine among the general public. Here, we investigated the debate in the Chinese digital context by analysing 1954 responses related to 100 questions about traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) treatment against COVID-19 on the Zhihu platform. Attitude function theory was applied to understand the reasons underlying public attitudes.Results showed that Zhihu users generally held a supportive attitude toward TCM. Their attitudes mainly came from their own experience and traditional media. The general users were more negative while medical professionals were more positive toward TCM. Ego defence (eg, derogating evidence sources) was used the most to support attitudes, followed by value expression (eg, believing in science). Supporters showed fewer expressions of faith (eg, the use of TCM is a kind of faith), politics (eg, supporting TCM is about politics) and science value (eg, TCM is a field of science), fewer ego defence, more patriotism and cultural confidence expressions (eg, TCM is a cultural pride) and more knowledge explanation (eg, TCM accelerates the metabolism of phlegm) than expected. Opposers showed fewer utilitarian and knowledge functions, fewer expressions of patriotism and more expressions of faith, politics and economics, but more ego defence functions than expected. Opposing posts were more likely to attract engagement than supporting and neutral posts. Posts that mentioned attitude functions generally attracted more engagement.Our findings indicate that TCM debate in modern China is not only relevant to medical science and health, but also rooted deeply in cultural ideology, politics and economics. The findings can provide global insights into the development of proactive policies and action plans that will help the integration of traditional medicine into modern healthcare systems.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
有用还是没用?中国社交网站上关于中药治疗 COVID-19 的讨论。
使用传统医学是一种全球现象,世卫组织倡导将其适当纳入现代医疗保健系统。然而,公众对传统医学的合法性却存在着激烈的争论。在此,我们通过分析知乎平台上 1954 个与 COVID-19 有关的 100 个传统中医治疗问题的回复,研究了中国数字背景下的这一争论。结果显示,知乎用户普遍对中医持支持态度。结果显示,知乎用户普遍对中医持支持态度,他们的态度主要来源于自身经验和传统媒体。普通用户对中医药持消极态度,而专业医务人员则持积极态度。在支持态度中,自我辩护(如贬低证据来源)使用最多,其次是价值表达(如相信科学)。与预期相比,支持者较少表达信仰(如使用中医是一种信仰)、政治(如支持中医与政治有关)和科学价值(如中医是一门科学),较少表达自我防卫,较多表达爱国主义和文化自信(如中医是一种文化自豪),较多表达知识解释(如中医能加速痰的新陈代谢)。反对者比预期表现出更少的功利和知识功能,更少的爱国主义表达,更多的信仰、政治和经济表达,但更多的自我防御功能。反对者的帖子比支持者和中立者的帖子更容易吸引参与。我们的研究结果表明,现代中国的中医辩论不仅与医学科学和健康相关,还深深植根于文化意识形态、政治和经济之中。我们的研究结果表明,现代中国的中医辩论不仅与医学科学和健康相关,而且深深植根于文化意识形态、政治和经济之中。这些研究结果可以为制定积极的政策和行动计划提供全球性的见解,从而帮助传统医学融入现代医疗体系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMJ Global Health
BMJ Global Health Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
11.40
自引率
4.90%
发文量
429
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: BMJ Global Health is an online Open Access journal from BMJ that focuses on publishing high-quality peer-reviewed content pertinent to individuals engaged in global health, including policy makers, funders, researchers, clinicians, and frontline healthcare workers. The journal encompasses all facets of global health, with a special emphasis on submissions addressing underfunded areas such as non-communicable diseases (NCDs). It welcomes research across all study phases and designs, from study protocols to phase I trials to meta-analyses, including small or specialized studies. The journal also encourages opinionated discussions on controversial topics.
期刊最新文献
The impact of a multi-faceted intervention on non-prescription dispensing of antibiotics by urban community pharmacies in Indonesia: a mixed methods evaluation. Water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH): the evolution of a global health and development sector. Cost-effectiveness of surgical interventions in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and critical analysis of recent evidence. Learning from the Montreal Protocol to improve the global governance of antimicrobial resistance. Leveraging investments, promoting transparency and mobilising communities: a qualitative analysis of news articles about how the Ebola outbreak informed COVID-19 response in five African countries.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1