ArticleComplementary medicine research2025
Personal Use and Attitude toward Integrative Medicine and Nursing among Employees at a German University Hospital: Results of a Cross-Sectional Study.
Article in Complementary medicine research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
<p>Introduction: Previous studies have shown that integrative medicine (IM) is of considerable relevance from the patients' perspective. The acceptance of healthcare professionals is essential to meet patient needs and integrate IM into routine clinical practice. The aim of this study was to assess personal use and attitudes toward IM, as well as the implementation of integrative nursing (IN), among employees at a German university hospital.
methodsA cross-sectional online study was conducted among employees at University Hospital Ulm in 2022. Univariate analysis of frequencies and cross-tabulations with chi-square tests were performed.
resultsA total of 244 employees participated in the survey, 80.7% of whom were female and 49.3% were nurses. The mean age was 38.3 ± 12.3 years. Most respondents were familiar with IM (87.3%; n = 179). Overall, 63.2% (n = 129) rated its benefit as high. A total of 26.1% (n = 54) indicated that IN had been implemented in their own work settings, while the majority (91.4%; n = 171) supported broader implementation. Interest in training and education on IN was expressed by 52.4% (n = 98). Subgroup analyses revealed statistically significant associations between age and familiarity with IM (p = 0.039), personal use of IM (p = 0.019), and the rating of its benefits (p = 0.009), as well as between work-related patient contact and interest in further IN training (p < 0.001). No significant associations were observed for sex and profession.
conclusionThe findings indicate a high level of personal use and favorable attitudes toward IM, along with notable interest in IN among hospital employees, highlighting potential for further implementation of IM within clinical practice. </p>.
Indexed as
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.