Objectives: Naturopathy is a traditional medicine system informed by codified philosophies and principles, and an emphasis on non-pharmacologic therapeutic interventions. While naturopathy is practiced by approximately 75 000 to 100 000 naturopathic practitioners in at least 98 countries, little is known about the international prevalence of history of consultation with a naturopathic practitioner. This study reports a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies describing the global prevalence of history of consultation with a naturopathic practitioner by the general population. Setting: The included literature was identified through a systematic search of eight databases between September and October 2019, as well as the grey literature. Participants: Studies were included if they reported the prevalence rate of consultations with a naturopathic practitioner by the general population Interventions: Survey items needed to report consultations with a naturopathic practitioner as defined in the country where data was collected, and not combine naturopathic consultations with other health services or only report consulations for illness populations. Primary and secondary outcome measures: Primary measures used for the analysis was consultations in the previous 12-months. Other prevalence timeframes were reported as secondary measures. Methods: Meta-analysis of prevalence data was conducted using random effects models based on individual countries and World Health Organisation (WHO) world regions. Results: The literature search identified eight manuscripts summarizing 13 studies reporting prevalence for inclusion in the review. All included studies had a low risk of bias. Meta-analysis of the included studies by world region found the 12-month prevalence of history of naturopathy consultations ranged from 1% in the Region of the Americas to 6% in the European and Western Pacific Regions. Conclusions: There are up to 6-fold differences in the prevalence of naturopathy consults over 12-months between and within world regions, which may be driven by a range of policy, legislative and social factors.

Background The transition from student to practitioner can be challenging, resulting in stress, burnout and attrition. While there has been ample research examining graduate medical and allied health practitioner experiences of transitioning to practice, there is a paucity of research exploring such experiences in newly qualified naturopathic medicine practitioners. In light of this knowledge gap, the objective of this study was to ascertain the experiences of practicing as a naturopath in Australia within the first 5 years post-graduation. Methods Using a qualitative descriptive approach, recent graduates of an Australian Bachelor of Naturopathy (or equivalent) program were invited to participate in a semi-structured telephone interview to address the study objective. Data were analysed utilising a framework approach. Results A total of 19 new graduates (94.7% female; 57.9% aged 40–59 years) undertook an interview. Five inter-related themes emerged from the data: practitioner, practice, proprietorship, professions, and perceptions. Connected with these themes were contrasting feelings, multiplicity of duties, small business challenges, professional collaboration, and professional identity, respectively. Conclusions Participants were generally content with their decision to become a naturopath. However, most were confronted by a range of challenges as they transitioned from graduate to practitioner, for which many felt ill-prepared. In light of the complexity of the issue, and the potential impact on the sustainability of the profession, it is evident that a multi-pronged, multi-stakeholder approach would be needed to better support graduate naturopath transition to practice.

ObjectivesNaturopathy is a traditional medicine system informed by codified philosophies and principles, and an emphasis on non-pharmacologic therapeutic interventions. While naturopathy is practised by approximately 75 000–100 000 000 naturopathic practitioners in at least 98 countries, little is known about the international prevalence of history of consultation with a naturopathic practitioner. This study reports a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies describing the global prevalence of history of consultation with a naturopathic practitioner by the general population.SettingThe included literature was identified through a systematic search of eight databases between September and October 2019, as well as the grey literature.ParticipantsStudies were included if they reported the prevalence rate of consultations with a naturopathic practitioner by the general population.InterventionsSurvey items needed to report consultations with a naturopathic practitioner as defined in the country where data was collected, and not combine naturopathic consultations with other health services or only report consulations for illness populations.Primary and secondary outcome measuresPrimary measures used for the analysis was consultations in the previous 12 months. Other prevalence timeframes were reported as secondary measures.MethodsMeta-analysis of prevalence data was conducted using random effects models based on individual countries and WHO world regions.ResultsThe literature search identified eight manuscripts summarising 14 studies reporting prevalence for inclusion in the review. All included studies had a low risk of bias. Meta-analysis of the included studies by world region found the 12-month prevalence of history of naturopathy consultations ranged from 1% in the Region of the Americas to 6% in the European and Western Pacific Regions.ConclusionsThere are up to sixfold differences in the prevalence of naturopathy consults over 12 months between and within world regions, which may be driven by a range of policy, legislative and social factors.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020145529.