ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2026
Barriers to recommendation of integrative oncology modalities in supportive care: a MASCC/SIO survey.
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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIntegrative oncology (IO) modalities aim to improve the quality of life of persons with cancer, including strategies to manage treatment and disease-related symptoms. As evidence increases to include IO in supportive care, interest grows globally. Understanding barriers to IO recommendation is key to facilitating its uptake.
methodsMembers of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) and the Society for Integrative Oncology (SIO) were invited to complete an online survey in Fall 2023 assessing barriers to IO recommendation on a 5-point scale. Descriptive statistics assessed demographic data and general counts of scaled agreement, while logistic regression analysis evaluated perceived barriers in relation to relevant covariates.
resultsOver 80% of respondents believed that healthcare professionals' (HCP) lack of knowledge with IO and lack of insurance/out-of-pocket costs were barriers to recommending IO. Approximately 80% agreed that lack of referral pathways was a logistical barrier and 85% reported lack of confidence in IO as an individual-level barrier. Respondents from Europe were 2.2 times more likely to agree with the perceived barrier of HCP knowledge, compared to respondents from North America (OR 2.22, 95% CI 1.05-4.67, p = 0.036). Lastly, compared to general physicians, integrative professionals were more likely to report perceptions that IO would delay conventional care delivery (OR 3.62, 95% CI 1.56-8.43, p = 0.0003).
conclusionsResults of this study highlight important barriers and facilitators of IO integration into standard supportive care globally. These findings represent perspectives from an international sample of MASCC and SIO members and may not apply to all oncology professionals. Further research is necessary to understand the global roadblocks that exist among practitioners interested in IO use.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.