Oncology researchers' and clinicians' perceptions of complementary, alternative, and integrative medicine: an international, cross-sectional survey

BackgroundComplementary, alternative, and integrative medicine (CAIM) has become an increasingly popular supportive therapy option for patients with cancer. The objective of this study was to investigate how researchers and clinicians in the oncology field perceive CAIM.MethodsWe conducted an online, anonymous, cross-sectional survey for researchers and clinicians who have published their work in oncology journals that are indexed in MEDLINE. The link to the survey was sent to 47, 991 researchers and clinicians whose contact information was extracted from their publications. The survey included various multiple-choice questions, and one open-ended question at the end to allow for any additional comments.Results751 respondents completed the survey, and they mostly identified themselves as researchers (n = 329, 45.13%), or as both researchers and clinicians (n = 332, 45.45%) in the field of oncology. Over half of the respondents perceive mind-body therapies (n = 354, 54.97%) to be the most promising CAIM category with regards to the prevention, treatment, and/or management of diseases related to oncology, and many respondents agreed that most CAIM therapies are safe (n = 218, 37.39%), and that clinicians should receive training on CAIM therapies via formal (n = 225, 38.59%) and supplemental education (n = 290, 49.83%). However, many respondents were unsure when asked if most CAIM therapies are effective (n = 202, 34.77%).ConclusionsThe findings from this study demonstrated great current interest in the use of CAIM in oncology. This information can serve as a foundation for conducting additional research and creating customized educational materials for researchers and clinicians in oncology.