ArticleBMC complementary medicine and therapies2026
The financial burden resulting from complementary and alternative medicine in oncology care.
Article in BMC complementary medicine and therapies, 2026. 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
backgroundComplementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is widely used by oncology patients to manage symptoms, reduce stress, and improve quality of life. Unlike conventional treatments, CAM is rarely reimbursed in Germany, resulting in significant out-of-pocket costs. These expenses may contribute to financial burden and financial toxicity, yet this dimension remains understudied.
methodsThis multicenter, open-label, cross-sectional study was conducted in 2024. A standardized anonymous questionnaire collected demographic, socioeconomic, and medical data, CAM utilization, out-of-pocket expenditures, and distress levels (NCCN Distress Thermometer). Descriptive statistics, Chi-square tests, Pearson correlations, and independent t-tests were applied.
resultsA total of 209 patients (median age 62.6 years, 52.6% female) participated; 57.4% reported CAM use. Female patients were more likely than males to use CAM (p < 0.001). Among CAM users, 71.7% incurred out-of-pocket expenses, averaging €124/month for women and €153/month for men. Expenditures were highest among patients with hematological malignancies (€229/month). A strong positive correlation was observed between the number of CAM modalities used and monthly costs (p < 0.001). No significant difference in distress was found between CAM users and non-users; however, female CAM users reported lower distress than their male counterparts (p < 0.05).
conclusionsCAM use is common among German oncology patients and generates substantial out-of-pocket costs, particularly in vulnerable subgroups. When combined with cancer-related income loss, these expenditures increase financial burden and may contribute to financial toxicity. Integrative oncology models, reimbursement strategies, and patient counseling are essential to mitigate economic vulnerability and ensure equitable access to supportive care.
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.