Model validity of randomised placebo-controlled trials of non-individualised homeopathic treatment

Author:

Van Wassenhoven Michel1,Rutten A.L.B.2,Klein-Laansma Christien T.3,Eizayaga José4,Pla i Castellsagué Anna5,Jong Miek C.367,Manchanda Raj K.8,Dantas Flávio9,Oberbaum Menachem10,Frye Joyce11,Roniger Helmut12,Baumgartner Stephan13,van Haselen Robbert14,Nicolai Ton2,Fisher Peter12,Mathie Robert T.15

Affiliation:

1. Belgian Homeopathic Medicines Registration Committee, FAMHP (Federal Agency for Medicines and Health Products), Belgium

2. Independent Researcher

3. Department Nutrition & Health, Louis Bolk Institute, Driebergen, The Netherlands

4. Department of Homeopathy, Maimonides University, Buenos Aires, Argentina

5. Research Sub-committee, European Committee for Homeopathy, Belgium

6. Department of Health Sciences, Mid-Sweden University, Sundsvall, Sweden

7. National Information and Knowledge Centre for Integrative Medicine, The Netherlands

8. Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy, India

9. Faculty of Medicine, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Brazil

10. Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel

11. Center for Integrative Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA

12. Royal London Hospital for Integrated Medicine, London, UK

13. Institute of Integrative Medicine, University of Witten-Herdecke, Germany

14. International Institute for Integrated Medicine, Kingston, UK

15. Homeopathy Research Institute, 142 Cromwell Road, London SW7 4EF, UK

Abstract

Background: The comprehensive systematic review of randomised placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) in homeopathy requires examination of a study's model validity of homeopathic treatment (MVHT) as well as its risk of bias (extent of reliable evidence). Objective: To appraise MVHT in those RCTs of non-individualised homeopathy that an associated investigation had judged as ‘not at high risk of bias’. Design: Systematic review. Methods: An assessment of MVHT was ascribed to each of 26 eligible RCTs. Another 49 RCTs were ineligible due to their high risk of bias. Main outcome measures: MVHT and the prior risk of bias rating per trial were merged to obtain a single overall quality designation (‘high’, ‘moderate’, ‘low’), based on the GRADE principle of downgrading. Results: The trials were rated as ‘acceptable MVHT’ (N = 9), ‘uncertain MVHT’ (N = 10) and ‘inadequate MVHT’ (N = 7); and, previously, as ‘reliable evidence’ (N = 3) and ‘non-reliable evidence’ (N = 23). The 26 trials were designated overall as: ‘high quality’ (N = 1); ‘moderate quality’ (N = 18); ‘low quality’ (N = 7). Conclusion: Of the 26 RCTs of non-individualised homeopathy that were judged ‘not at high risk of bias’, nine have been rated ‘acceptable MVHT’. One of those nine studies was designated ‘high quality’ overall (‘acceptable MVHT’ and ‘reliable evidence’), and is thus currently the only reported RCT that represents best therapeutic practice as well as unbiased evidence in non-individualised homeopathy. As well as minimising risk of bias, new RCTs in this area must aim to maximise MVHT and clarity of reporting.

Publisher

Georg Thieme Verlag KG

Subject

Complementary and alternative medicine

Cited by 10 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3