About Academy Publications
AIHM’s publications include:
Commentary on scholarly articles for clinicians keeping pace with the evidence. David Riley, MD, serves as Chief Editor.
Advances in integrative healthcare curated by AIHM President, Mimi Guarneri, MD, FACC, ABIHM
News, opinions and musings submitted by AIHM Members
Downloadable PDF telling the Academy’s story and why its formation is so timely and important
Monthly newsletter about Integrative Health & Medicine news, events, membership, and education opportunities
Complimentary or discounted subscriptions available to AIHM Community as Member Benefits
Background: About AIHM Research
Clinicians around the world constantly receive new and sometimes contradictory information—every year more than a million scientific articles are added to the National Library of Medicine.
The Academy of Integrative Health & Medicine (AIHM) recognizes the importance of science as it tries to balance internal validity and clinical relevance. We monitor and review the published evidence and support and utilize the work of groups such as The Equator Network —devoted to enhancing the quality and transparency of health research and the Cochrane Collaboration—which has a field office at the University of Maryland for Integrative Medicine.
The path to the successful treatment of a community or an individual patient cannot always be reduced to a single treatment; patients are complex and often present with chronic conditions. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the external evidence from clinical trials sometimes provide a verdict on unsettled medical debates—sometimes they do not. Clinicians are asked to make decisions for their patients drawn from an incomplete and sometimes contradictory body of information. (1)
AIHM reviews evidences on the clinical impact of healthcare policy, therapies and interventions and participates in the development of evidence-informed clinical practice recommendations and guidelines for integrative medicine. We recognize that high quality evidence from controlled trials and systematic reviews do not necessarily imply strong recommendations, and that recommendations can arise from patient preference, interprofessional approaches, and information sources such as case reports. (2)
Historically, the practice of medicine often used a mentorship model. The evidence-informed approach is evolving—in part because we have come to recognize that treatment cannot always be reduced to an algorithm and in part because new data-intensive analytic techniques can sort through systematically collected data from the point of care. AIHM believes that evidence-informed approaches should include patient preferences, interprofessional approaches and be culturally sensitive. The practice of medicine is global—AIHM believes changes like these in how we approach and use research will improve the quality of care and reduce costs.
Integrating the science of clinical research with the art of practice is not just a technique—it is a social movement.
1 Mukherjee S. The laws of medicine: field notes from an uncertain science. TED Books, 2015.
2 Guyatt G, Oxman A, Schünemann H. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 2008 April 26:336(7650);924-928