Indeed, the NPI Registry contributes to the development of precision medicine. For example, how can we advance this field in the non-pharmacological treatment of pain without confusing patients when a prestigious medical school like Stanford publishes such a vague, incomplete, and unranked list on its website?

• Physical activity
• Acupressure
• Acupuncture
• Application of heat or cold
• Aquatherapy
• Art therapy
• Biofeedback
• Family coaching
• Individual coaching
• Psychological conditioning
• Desensitization
• Therapeutic education
• Occupational therapy
• Horticultural therapy
• Hypnosis
• Physiotherapy
• Massage lotions
• Meditation
• Music therapy
• Posturology
• Companion presence
• Psychosocial support
• Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS)
• Comfort therapy
• Theatre therapy
• Psychosocial therapy
• Tonification and strengthening
• Yoga

How many hopes dashed? How much time wasted? How many futile efforts? How much money squandered? How many unnecessary carbon emissions from transport? This subtly highlights pharmacological treatments and pain surgeries, which have precise contents and proven effects. The NPIS and its partners propose a solution to break this deadlock in favor of those affected by health issues. The goal is to provide reliable information on the most relevant NPI. It is also about no longer opposing pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapies, but rather associating them wisely and at the right time.

A scientific validation model for medications has existed since the 1960s, with specific regulations recognized worldwide (e.g., FDA, EMA, ANSM). A similar procedure has recently been implemented for medical devices in Europe. However, until now, no consensual model existed for nutritional, bodily, and psychosocial health services due to confusions between approach, protocol, and technique/ingredient. A participatory, pragmatic, and multidisciplinary consensus work followed international scientific health recommendations to address this for NPI (Ninot et al., 2023).

This work took into account the specificities of NPI, health risks, the balance between internal and external validity, the justification of explanatory mechanisms, ethical considerations in health, and respect for contexts of use. The NPIS Model accelerates research through the harmonization of methodological and ethical expectations in NPI. It also enhances the identification, referencing, transferability, and implementation of NPI for the benefit of user health and safety, improving the quality of training.

Ultimately, the NPIS Model distinguishes between individualized, science-based services aimed at addressing known health issues in Western medicine and occupational practices (lifestyle, art of living, work, sociocultural activity, personal development, pursuit of happiness, spiritual practice, etc.). In this sense, the model does not impede individuals' freedom to choose a particular lifestyle. It aims to address a specific health issue for an individual or a group of people within a limited timeframe and a framework regulated by the health sector. The NPIS Model encourages innovations across all other health sectors, particularly in health organizations and early identification actions for health problems.

The NPIS has outlined a roadmap from 2021 to 2030 aligned with the strategies of European and international health institutions. To this end, it has initiated discussions with the European Public Health Association (EUPHA), involved in health service innovation, the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), which is planning to create a registry, the European Commission, which aims to promote "health, nutrition, mental health, and psychosocial support to communities," and WHO Europe, which intends to identify the "most effective health interventions" by 2030. The NPIS submitted several European projects in 2024.

The NPIS is also engaging with WHO, which has advocated for "self-care interventions" since 2022, included NPI in its Global Action Plan for Mental Health published in 2022, and identified "the most effective and feasible interventions in a national context" in a report published in 2021. Additionally, it is collaborating with other international organizations such as UNESCO, which has promoted "specific health and well-being education interventions" since 2016, UNICEF, which has advocated for sharing "effective health interventions" since 2016 and developing "primary healthcare" since 2018, the UN, which has called for "accelerating essential health services" since 2023, and the Coalition of Partnerships for Universal Health Coverage and Global Health, advocating for "people-centered, comprehensive, and integrated services" since 2021.

Thus, an ecosystem for NPI, from research to practice through training and delivery, is being constructed, with NPIS actively participating. It involves all stakeholders, both academic and non-academic, to create a true value chain benefiting personalized and precision medicine based on science, sustainable health, and equitable longevity. With over 2.1 billion people aged over 60 by 2050, multistakeholder collaborations will be the foundation of a sustainable and equitable longevity economy.

This is why forums on NPI have been organized since 2024 in France and Europe, called NPIS Forum. An international summit titled NPIS Summit takes place every year in October, and regional events called NPIS Satellite gather professionals and users around a health theme.

As of April 2019, there were 46 evaluation models for NPI in the scientific literature (Carbonnel and Ninot, 2019). These models were constructed by researchers for researchers, often from a monodisciplinary perspective and rarely from a patient-centered approach. This led to significant heterogeneity in study protocols and the way NPI were conceived (approach, method, technique, or materials). The results were scattered, debatable, poorly transferable, and rarely reproducible. Consequently, these practices were not widely recognized outside the study context (dependent on the establishment and/or practitioner). This situation raised doubts about their effectiveness (e.g., efficacy, safety, relevance, utility, cost-effectiveness), their content (e.g., heterogeneity in doses, procedures, ingredients, techniques, contexts, target populations), their approval (e.g., ethics committees), their dissemination (e.g., conflicting reviewer opinions), their teaching (e.g., protocols, best practices), and their recognition (e.g., authorization, integration into official classifications, reimbursement). This lack of a consensual evaluation model for NPI suggested that each professional had to reinvent their program for every new patient, given the wide or contradictory recommendations from authorities, agencies, and scientific societies. It also implied that only the patient-provider relationship mattered in the health effects induced (Ninot, 2020). Moreover, it left the door open for pseudoscientific practices and, more broadly, parallel medicine, along with all the obscurantist, health-related, sectarian, political, and judicial issues that are known in France (Miviludes, 2022; CNOI, 2023; CNOM, 2023) and around the world (Ernst and Smith, 2018). This idea was also gaining traction in the United States in the field of oncology, aiming to juxtapose two medical offerings: one based on experimental science, primarily focused on surgery, medication, radiotherapy, and medical devices, and the other described as "complementary, integrative, or traditional," based on individual experience, opinions, and traditions (Mao et al., 2022). This second offering claimed exclusivity in the domains of prevention and care, emphasizing care for the person versus cure for the disease. Thus, the NPIS Model was co-constructed with the idea that experimental science could demonstrate the existence of effective, safe, and reproducible prevention and care protocols. This work was supported by seed funding for participatory research from INSERM and involved over 1,000 participants under the guidance of a committee of 22 multidisciplinary experts, including two user representatives. This transdisciplinary innovation is currently supported by 30 French scientific societies, the National Center for Palliative Care and End of Life, INCa, and the French Platform for Clinical Research Networks.

PSYCHOSOCIAL DOMINANCE

Psychotherapies:

• Cognitive Stimulation Therapy for memory strategies in Alzheimer’s disease in 14 sessions by a psychologist in a healthcare facility, health center, or private practice.
• Mindfulness Based Stress Reduction (MBSR-BC) program against anxiety during cancer treatments in 8 group sessions by a clinical psychologist, psychiatrist, or physician in an oncology department, a patient association, a private practice, a health center, or a healthcare facility.
• Acceptance and Commitment Therapy for chronic pain in 9 group sessions by a clinical psychologist or psychiatrist in a healthcare facility, health center, or private practice.
• Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Insomnia (CBT-I) in 6-8 individual sessions, either remote or in-person, by a neuropsychologist, clinical psychologist, psychiatrist, or neurologist in a healthcare facility, health center, or private practice.
• Now I Can Do Heights program using virtual reality to treat acrophobia (fear of heights) by a clinical psychologist or psychiatrist in a private practice or health center.

Health Prevention Programs:

• Living Well with COPD therapeutic education program against symptoms and exacerbations of COPD over 2 months with 4 sessions, in-person or remote, by a nurse, physician, or pharmacist in a healthcare facility, health center, or private practice.
• CHESS Method (Chronic Headache Education and Self-management) for migraine self-management by a nurse or physician in a healthcare facility, health center, or private practice.
• MyFriend Youth Program for preventing anxiety and depression among students aged 12 to 15 years, 10 sessions by a school psychologist or school nurse in an educational institution.
• Spiegel Hypnotherapy Method specialized in smoking cessation in 3 sessions by a psychologist, nurse, physician, or hypnotherapist in a private practice, healthcare facility, health center, or private practice.
• Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Depression (CBT-d) by a clinical psychologist or psychiatrist in a healthcare facility, health center, or private practice.

CORPOREAL DOMINANCE

Physiotherapy Protocols:

• McKenzie Method for back pain by a physiotherapist in a healthcare facility, health center, or private practice.
• Pelvic Floor Muscle Training (PFMT) program by a midwife or physiotherapist in a health center or private practice.
• Rehabilitation program following hip prosthesis in 6 to 10 sessions by a physiotherapist in a healthcare facility, health center, or private practice.

Adapted Physical Activity Programs:

• Dance Therapy for Parkinson’s Disease addressing psychological symptoms of Parkinson’s by a physical activity instructor in a healthcare facility, health center, or private practice.
• Re-exercise program at ventilatory threshold against dyspnea caused by COPD by a physical activity instructor or physiotherapist in a healthcare facility, health center, or private practice.
• Anti-fatigue APA program during treatments for breast, prostate, or colon cancer by a physical activity instructor in a healthcare facility, health center, or private practice.

Thermal Treatments:

• Specialized thermal cure for gonarthrosis by a physiotherapist or thermal agent in a thermal facility.

NUTRITIONAL DOMINANCE

• Gluten-free diet for celiac disease by a dietitian in a healthcare facility, health center, or private practice.
• FODMAP diet for gastrointestinal disorders by a dietitian in a healthcare facility, health center, or private practice.