A systematic review of the quality of homeopathic pathogenetic trials published from 1945 to 1995

Homeopathy

Volumn 96, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 4-16

  Dantas, F ^a,b   Fisher, P ^c   Walach, H ^d   Wieland, F ^h   Rastogi, D P ^e   Teixeira, H ^a   Koster, D ^h   Jansen, J P ^h   Eizayaga, J ^f   Alvarez, M E P ^g   Marim, M ^h   Belon, P ^h   Weckx, L L M ^b  

^a FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF UBERLÂNDIA   (Brazil)

^b FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF SÃO PAULO   (Brazil)

^c UCL Hospitals NHS Trust   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF NORTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

^e Central Council of Research in Homeopathy   (India)

^f DEPARTAMENTO DE CIENCIAS NATURALES Y ANTROPOLOGÍA   (Argentina)

^g INSTITUTO POLITÉCNICO NACIONAL   (Mexico)

^h NONE

Author keywords

evidence based medicine; homeopathic pathogenetic trial; homeopathy; human volunteers; methods; proving; systematic review

Indexed keywords

BELLADONNA ALKALOID; COPPER; HOMEOPATHIC AGENT; NICOTINAMIDE; PLACEBO; PROPRANOLOL;

ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; DRUG WITHDRAWAL; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; EXTERNAL VALIDITY; FUMARIA; GERANIUM; HERACLEUM; HOMEOPATHY; HUMAN; HYOSCYAMUS; INTERNAL VALIDITY; MEDICAL INFORMATION; MEDICAL RESEARCH; METHODOLOGY; QUALITY CONTROL; RYE; SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; UNSPECIFIED SIDE EFFECT; VERONICA; VIOLACEAE;

HOMEOPATHY; HUMANS; MATERIA MEDICA; META-ANALYSIS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RESEARCH DESIGN; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL;

EID: 33846173971     PISSN: 14754916     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.homp.2006.11.005     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Hahnemann S. Organon of Medicine. 6th edn (1982), J.P. Tarcher, Los Angeles
2. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English (1990), Oxford University Press, Oxford
3. Dantas F. How can we get more reliable information from homoeopathic pathogenetic trials?. Br Hom J 85 (1996) 230-236
4. Hahnemann S. Materia Medica Pura. 2v (1936), Homoeopathic Publishing Co., London
5. Campbell A. Lycopodium from provings. Br Hom J 70 (1981) 94-99
6. Campbell A. Rhus from provings. Br Hom J 70 (1981) 179-182
7. Stolberg M. Die Homöopathie auf dem Prüfstein. Der erste Doppelblindversouch der Medizingeschichte im Jahr 1835. Münchener Medizinische Wochenschrift 138 (1996) 364-366
8. The Medical Investigation Club of Baltimore. A Pathogenetic Materia Medica. Philadelphia: Boericke & Tafel, 1895.
9. Bellows HP. The Test Drug-Proving of the O. O. & L. Society : A Reproving of Belladonna Being an Experimental Study of the Pathogenic Action of that Drug Upon the healthy Human Organism. Boston: The O. O. & L. Society, 1906.
10. Hughes R. A Manual of Pharmacodinamics. 6th edn (1912), Leath and Ross, London
11. Dantas F., and Fisher P. A systematic review of homoeopathic pathogenetic trials ('provings') published in the United Kingdom from 1945 to 1995. In: Ernst E., and Hahn E.G. (Eds). Homoeopathy: A Critical Appraisal (1998), Butterworth-Heinemann, London 69-97
12. Anello C., and Fleiss J.L. Exploratory or analytic meta-analysis: should we distinguish between them?. J Clin Epidemiol 48 (1995) 109-116
13. Hering C. Guiding Symptoms of our Materia Medica vol 1 (1974), B. Jain Publishers, New Delhi
14. Juni P., Altman D.G., and Egger M. Systematic reviews in health care: assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. BMJ 323 (2001) 42-46
15. Sackett D.L. Bias in analytic research. J Chron Dis 32 (1979) 51-63
16. Blackwell B., Bloomfield S.S., and Buncher C.R. Demonstration to medical students of placebo responses and non-drug factors. Lancet 1 (1972) 1279-1282
17. Fillmore M., and Vogel-Sprott M. Expected effect of caffeine on motor performance predicts the type of response to placebo. Psychopharmacology 106 (1992) 209-214
18. Drici M., Raybaud F., De Lunardo C., Iacono P., and Gustovic P. Influence of the behaviour pattern on the nocebo response of healthy volunteers. Br J Clin Pharmacol 39 (1995) 204-206
19. Sibille M., Deigat N., Olagnier V., Durand D.V., and Levrat R. Adverse events in phase one studies: a study in 430 health volunteers. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 42 (1992) 389-393
20. Reidenberg M.M., and Lowenthal D.T. Adverse nondrug reactions. New Engl J Med 279 (1968) 678-679
21. Dantas F. Incidência de efeitos patogenéticos não-farmacológicos e triviais numa amostra de estudantes de medicina. Rev Homeopatia 69 (2004) 5-10
22. Flack J.M., Ensrud K.E., Mascioli S., Launer C.A., Svendsen K., Elmer P.J., and Grimm Jr. R.H. Racial and ethnic modifiers of the salt-blood pressure response. Hypertension 17 1 Suppl (1991) I115-I121
23. Payer L. Medicine & Culture: Varieties of Treatment in the United States, England, West Germany, and France (1996), First Owl Books, New York
24. Tran C., Knowles S.R., Liu B.A., and Shear N.H. Gender differences in adverse drug reactions. J Clin Pharmacol 38 (1998) 1003-1009
25. Martin R.M., Biswas P.N., Freemantle S.N., Pearce G.L., and Mann R.D. Age and sex distribution of suspected adverse drug reactions to newly marketed drugs in general practice in England: analysis of 48 cohort studies. Br J Clin Pharmacol 46 (1998) 505-511
26. Schroyens F, Cecchi M, Saetonne MF et al. Homeopathic proving of Hydrogen. Proceedings of 54th International Congress of LMHI, Milan; 1996.
27. Sherr J. The Homeopathic Proving of Hydrogen (1992), Dynamis School, West Malvern
28. Schulz K.F., Chalmers I., Hayes R.J., and Altman D.G. Empirical evidence of bias: dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA 273 (1995) 408-412
29. Ioannidis J.P.A. Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med 2 8 (2005) e124
30. Green D.M. Pre-existing conditions, placebo reactions and "side effects". Ann Int Med 60 (1964) 255-265
31. Dantas F., and Rampes H. Do homeopathic medicines provoke adverse effects? A systematic review. Br Hom J 89 Suppl 1 (2000) S35-S38
32. Greenland S. Quality scores are useless and potentially misleading. Am J Epidemiol 140 (1994) 290-296
33. Juni P., Witschi A., Bloch R., and Egger M. The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis. JAMA 282 (1999) 1054-1060
34. Bhandari M., Richards R.R., Prague S., and Schemitsch E.H. Quality in the reporting of randomized trials in surgery: is the Jadad scale reliable?. Control Clin Trials 22 (2001) 687-688
35. Walach H., Sherr J., Schneider R., Shabi R., Bond A., and Rieberer G. Homeopathic proving symptoms: result of a local, non-local or placebo process? A blinded, placebo-controlled pilot study. Homeopathy 93 (2004) 179-185
36. Fisher P., and Dantas F. Homeopathic pathogenetic trials of Acidum malicum and Acidum ascorbicum. Br Hom J 90 (2001) 118-125
37. Signorini A., Lubrano A., Manuele G., et al. Classical and new proving methodology: Provings of Plumbum metallicum and Piper methysticum and comparison with a classical proving of Plumbum metallicum. Homeopathy 94 (2005) 164-174
38. Brien S., Lewith G., and Bryant T. Ultramolecular homeopathy has no observable clinical effects. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled proving trial of Belladonna 30C. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 56 (2003) 562-568
39. Riley D.S. Contemporary drug provings. J Am Inst Hom 87 (1994) 161-165
40. Calabrese E.J. Paradigm lost, paradigm found: the re-emergence of hormesis as a fundamental dose response model in the toxicological sciences. Environ Pollut 138 (2005) 379-411