Challenges to complementary and alternative medical research: Focal issues influencing integration into a cancer care model

Abstract

Complementary and alternative therapies are increasingly used by cancer patients for palliative and postcancer preventive and/or wellness care. It is critical that evidence-based models be employed to both provide information for patients' use and informed consent and for physicians to advise patients and assess relative risk:benefit ratios of using specific complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) approaches within the cancer care paradigm. Research models for biomedicine have been somewhat limited when applied to broader, more holistic conceptualizations of health common to many forms of CAM. Thus, while numerous challenges to studying CAM exist, a fundamental question is not just what CAM practices should be studied but how CAM should be studied. The authors propose a model that emphasizes methodologie rigor yet approaches CAM research according to relative levels of evidence, meaning, and context, ranging from experimental, quantitative studies of mechanism to qualitative, observational studies of noetic/salutogenic variables. Responsibility for training researchers prepared to meet such challenges rests on both CAM and mainstream academic institutions, and care must be taken to avoid philosophical and practical pitfalls that might befall a myopic perspective of integration.