ArticleBMC complementary medicine and therapies2026
Treatment choices: insights into disease-specific use and self-perceived benefits of traditional, complementary and integrative medicine in Germany.
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrevious cross-sectional studies suggest that Traditional, Complementary and Integrative Medicine (TCIM) is used frequently in Germany. We assessed TCIM usage patterns across different disease categories in the German population.
methodIn this cross-sectional survey of an online-representative sample of the German population aged 18-75 years, participants were asked about their use and acceptance of TCIM. Participants were also queried about 15 illness categories. Health-related quality of life was assessed using the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire. Data were analyzed descriptively and inferentially.
resultsA total of 4,065 individuals (52% female) responded. 70% had used TCIM at some point in their lives, 32% in the last 12 months, and 18% were current users. Over half (52%) reported a mostly or very positive attitude towards TCIM. The highest rates of TCIM use were reported for acute respiratory illness (55.9%), chronic gastrointestinal illness (51.4%) and acute gastrointestinal illness (49.2%). The illness-specific, self-reported benefit from TCIM ranged from 61.4 to 86.2% (mean 70.8%) and remained high even among individuals of poorer health-related quality of life. No relation between TCIM use across different disease categories and the global research activity in those categories was apparent in the scatter plot.
conclusionsTCIM is widely used and perceived as beneficial for acute and chronic conditions in Germany. Individuals with poorer health status also reported substantial benefit. Stakeholders in the German healthcare system should critically examine the high level of TCIM use, promote rigorous scientific evaluation, integrate evidence-informed TCIM with conventional medicine, and ensure appropriate reimbursement for TCIM through statutory health insurance.
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.