ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2026
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.
Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 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
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis cross-sectional survey aimed to assess the impact of integrative oncology services within the public Tuscan Health System (THS), by evaluating the perspectives of the healthcare professionals involved, with particular attention to opportunities and potential challenges.
methodsThe Tuscan Regional Working Group 'Integration of Complementary Medicine in the Regional Oncology Network' approved a 15-item questionnaire (14 multiple-choice and one open-ended question) addressed to oncologists and healthcare professionals working in oncology departments. The survey was administered anonymously via Google Forms in November 2024, and data collection concluded in December 2024.
resultsAmong 176 respondents, the majority were medical oncologists (39.2%), followed by nurses (33%), psycho-oncologists (4.5%), and other professionals. The impact of integrative oncology services on cancer patients was evaluated as follows: useful (32.4%), very useful (29.5%), fair (23.3%), poor (11.4%), and irrelevant (3.4%). Regarding the frequency with which respondents recommend that patients visit public integrative oncology clinics, 29% reported "sometimes", 22.2% "rarely", 15.9% "fairly often", 15.3% "often", 9.1% "very often", and 8.5% "never". Notably, 47.7% of oncologists reported recommending CIM to cancer patients. The most frequently recommended interventions were acupuncture (51%), nutritional counselling (27%) and integrative medicine (11%), followed by traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) techniques, energy-based exercises, homeopathy, and others.
conclusionsThe integration of complementary and integrative medicine (CIM) into oncology appears feasible. Shared clinical practice and open dialogue may help to reduce mutual prejudices and institutional barriers, ultimately benefiting patients with cancer. Further studies are warranted to better assess the clinical impact and generalizability of integrative oncology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42631763What 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.