Journal: Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education
This national survey study assessed how oncology trainees and clinicians view integrative oncology (IO) training and what they see as barriers to formal education in this area.
An 18-question electronic survey was distributed to hematology/oncology, radiation oncology, and palliative care program directors, physicians, fellows, and internal medicine residents planning to enter these fields. Programs were identified through the ACGME, and surveys were sent weekly across two separate 4‑week periods. Descriptive statistics summarized responses.
Key findings:
- Perceived value of IO: Among 208 eligible respondents, most (71.6%) rated IO as valuable or essential to oncology care.
- Interest in IO education: A substantial majority (64.2%) expressed interest in formal IO education.
- Current training gap: Despite this interest, 85.4% reported little or no prior training in integrative medicine.
- Program director views: Program directors similarly viewed IO training favorably, with 50% calling it valuable and 13.3% essential.
Perceived barriers to IO education:
- Lack of an established curriculum
- Limited faculty with appropriate expertise
- Inadequate funding
- Time constraints within existing training programs
Preferred training formats:
- Hybrid approaches such as certificate programs (48%)
- Fellowship “distinction tracks” (44%)
- Less interest in a separate, standalone IO fellowship
Overall, the study identifies a clear national training gap: strong interest and perceived value of integrative oncology among oncology professionals contrasted with limited existing education and structural barriers. The authors conclude that there is support for developing structured, scalable IO educational pathways embedded within current oncology training frameworks.