Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) consists of a plethora of therapeutic approaches aiming to both characterize and treat diseases. Its utilization has gained significant popularity in the western world and is even backed by the World Health Organization's decision to include TCM diagnostic patterns into the new revision of the International Classification of Diseases code, the global standard for diagnostic health information. As these developments and potentially far-reaching decisions can affect modern healthcare systems and daily clinical work as well as wildlife conservation, its underlying factual basis must be critically examined. This article therefore provides an overview of the evidence underlying the basic TCM concepts, such as Qi, meridians, acupuncture, pulse and tongue diagnostics as well as traditional herbal treatments. Moreover, it discusses whether scientific literature on TCM reflects the current standard for evidence-based research, as described in good scientific practice and good clinical practice guidelines. Importantly, misinformation regarding the therapeutic efficacy of animal-derived substances has lead and currently leads to problems with wildlife preservation and animal ethics. Nevertheless, the (re-)discovery of artemisinin more than 50 years ago introduced a novel development in TCM: the commingling of Eastern and Western medicine, the appreciation of both systems. The need for more rigorous approaches, fulfilment of and agreement to current guidelines to achieve highquality research are of utmost relevance. Thereby, ancient knowledge of herbal species and concoctions may serve as a possible treasure box rather than Pandora's box.

ObjectivesDespite 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 and campaigns to integrate TCM into national healthcare systems have occurred while public perception and usage of TCM, especially in Europe, remains undetermined. Accordingly, this study investigates TCM’s popularity, usage and perceived scientific support, as well as its relationship to homeopathy and vaccinations.Design/SettingWe performed a cross-sectional survey of the Austrian population. Participants were either recruited on the street (in-person) or online (web-link) via a popular Austrian newspaper.Participants1382 individuals completed our survey. The sample was poststratified according to data derived from Austria’s Federal Statistical Office.Outcome measuresAssociations between sociodemographic factors, opinion towards TCM and usage of complementary medicine (CAM) were investigated using a Bayesian graphical model.ResultsWithin our poststratified sample, TCM was broadly known (89.9% of women, 90.6% of men), with 58.9% of women and 39.5% of men using TCM between 2016 and 2019. Moreover, 66.4% of women and 49.7% of men agreed with TCM being supported by science. We found a positive relationship between perceived scientific support for TCM and trust in TCM-certified medical doctors (ρ=0.59, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.73). Moreover, perceived scientific support for TCM was negatively correlated with proclivity to get vaccinated (ρ=−0.26, 95% CI −0.43 to –0.08). Additionally, our network model yielded associations between TCM-related, homeopathy-related and vaccination-related variables.ConclusionsTCM is widely known within the Austrian general population and used by a substantial proportion. However, a disparity exists between the commonly held public perception that TCM is scientific and findings from evidence-based studies. Emphasis should be placed on supporting the distribution of unbiased, science-driven information.

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.