ArticleEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2022
Complementary and Integrative Approaches to Cancer: A Pilot Survey of Attitudes and Habits among Cancer Patients in Italy.
Article in Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Questionnaire of evaluation of satisfaction and impact of the integrative oncology activities of the Tuscan Regional Health Service addressed to oncologists and health professionals of oncology departments.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Article
- Article
- The role of disease duration in the use of complementary and integrative medicine for cancer-related fatigue: a cross-sectional study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Article
- Bridging the gap: attitudes and practices toward complementary and alternative medicine among oncology patients and healthcare professionals in Croatia.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Interplay of precision therapeutics and MD study: Calocybe indica's potentials against cervical cancer and its interaction with VEGF via octadecanoic acid.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2024Article
- Sulforaphane Inhibits Adhesion and Migration of Cisplatin- and Gemcitabine-Resistant Bladder Cancer Cells In Vitro.Nutrients · 2024Article
- Predictors of herbal medicine use among cancer patients.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023Article
- Anti-Cancer Effects of Artesunate in Human 3D Tumor Models of Different Complexity.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Current Characteristics of Herbal Medicine Interventions for Cancer on Clinical Databases: A Cross-Sectional Study.Integrative cancer therapiesReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cancer patients are among the main consumers of traditional, complementary, integrative, and alternative medicine (TCIM) such as natural products (herbals, integrators, etc.) and mind and body practices (yoga, acupuncture, etc.). Methods: A questionnaire on TCIM was submitted to 415 Italian cancer patients. The questionnaire consisted of three sections: (i) biographical and clinical information; (ii) use of natural substances; and (iii) use of mind-body practices. Results: 406 patients completed the questionnaire. The prevalence of TCIM use was 72.3%. Of them, 75.6% started to use TCIM after a tumor diagnosis. The main reasons for using TCIM were to mitigate side effects (65.0%), to regain physical and mental balance (35.9%), to relieve pain (18.3%), and to improve the efficacy of cancer therapy (16.0%). 44.7% of patients taking natural products used them during conventional therapies (chemotherapy, radiotherapy, etc.), and in 67.5% of cases without consulting a doctor. As a consequence, only about 50% of patients taking natural substances used these compounds appropriately, and the most common errors were related with the purpose of reducing the side effects of the therapy (52.3%) and for boosting immune system (32.1%). Conclusions: There is an impelling need to provide patients with scientifically validated information to raise awareness about the benefits and risks of using TCIM.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.