ABSTRACT
Introduction Despite the paucity of evidence verifying its efficacy and safety, traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) is expanding in popularity and political support. Decisions to include TCM diagnoses in the International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision (ICD-11) by the World Health Organization (WHO) and campaigns to integrate TCM into national healthcare systems have occurred whilst the public perception and usage of TCM, especially in Europe, remains undetermined. Accordingly, this study investigates the popularity, usage patterns, perception of scientific support for TCM, and its relationship to homeopathy.
Methods A cross-sectional survey was performed in Austria and data from 1382 participants were analysed. A Bayesian network model retrieved partial correlations indicating distinct associations between sociodemographic determinants, complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) usage patterns, readiness to vaccinate, and TCM related variables.
Results TCM was broadly known by the Austrian population (89.9% of women, 90.6% of men), with 58.9% of women and 39.5% of men using TCM between 2016 and 2019. 66.4% of women and 49.7% of men agreed with TCM being supported by science. We found a strong positive relationship between the perceived scientific support for TCM and trust in TCM-certified medical doctors. Moreover, perceived scientific support for TCM was negatively correlated with the proclivity to get vaccinated. Additionally, our Bayesian network model yielded distinct associations between TCM-, homeopathy-, and vaccination-related variables.
Conclusion TCM is widely known within the Austrian general population and actively used by a substantial proportion. However, a crucial disparity exists between the commonly held public perception that TCM is scientific and findings from evidence-based studies. As public opinion towards TCM, and the proclivity to use it, are promoted through institutionalisation and official acknowledgement, it would be critical to sustain and support the distribution of unbiased, science-driven information by governmental institutions and policymakers to encourage informed patient-driven decision-making.
Strengths and limitations of this study
This is the first study to comprehensively explore the usage patterns and sociodemographic associations of TCM in a European population, not based on data deriving from the seventh round of the European Social Survey.
We are the first study on CAM usage patterns to graphically explore and report data using a Bayesian Gaussian copula graphical model—thereby, retrieving distinct partial correlations.
We provide an up-to-date summary of TCM, set forth our findings at a geopolitical scale and highlight that the discrepancy between the paucity of evidence underpinning most TCM modalities and the international promotion of TCM is also reflected in the widely-held public perception that TCM is supported by science.
Due to the retrospective character of our cross-sectional survey, answers are naturally prone to recall and response bias.
Our sample is skewed towards the young, people with higher levels of education, and shows a relative underrepresentation of males. Therefore, we post-stratified our sample using representative data from Austria’s federal statistical office “Statistik Austria” as a robustness check.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The study was funded by the Medical University of Vienna. Award/grant number: N/A.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
After correspondence with the chair of the ethics committee of the Medical University of Vienna (Dr. Martin Brunner), ethical approval for this work was waived in 2019.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
The html layout of the abstract has been updated.
Data availability statement
The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are readily available from our GitHub repository: https://github.com/fdabl/TCM-Analysis.
