NDLI: Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of non-individualised homeopathic treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis

Content Provider	Springer Nature : BioMed Central
Author	Mathie, Robert T. Ramparsad, Nitish Legg, Lynn A. Clausen, Jürgen Moss, Sian Davidson, Jonathan R. T. Messow, Claudia-Martina McConnachie, Alex
Abstract	Background A rigorous systematic review and meta-analysis focused on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of non-individualised homeopathic treatment has not previously been reported. We tested the null hypothesis that the main outcome of treatment using a non-individualised (standardised) homeopathic medicine is indistinguishable from that of placebo. An additional aim was to quantify any condition-specific effects of non-individualised homeopathic treatment. Methods Literature search strategy, data extraction and statistical analysis all followed the methods described in a pre-published protocol. A trial comprised ‘reliable evidence’ if its risk of bias was low or it was unclear in one specified domain of assessment. ‘Effect size’ was reported as standardised mean difference (SMD), with arithmetic transformation for dichotomous data carried out as required; a negative SMD indicated an effect favouring homeopathy. Results Forty-eight different clinical conditions were represented in 75 eligible RCTs. Forty-nine trials were classed as ‘high risk of bias’ and 23 as ‘uncertain risk of bias’; the remaining three, clinically heterogeneous, trials displayed sufficiently low risk of bias to be designated reliable evidence. Fifty-four trials had extractable data: pooled SMD was –0.33 (95% confidence interval (CI) –0.44, –0.21), which was attenuated to –0.16 (95% CI –0.31, –0.02) after adjustment for publication bias. The three trials with reliable evidence yielded a non-significant pooled SMD: –0.18 (95% CI –0.46, 0.09). There was no single clinical condition for which meta-analysis included reliable evidence. Conclusions The quality of the body of evidence is low. A meta-analysis of all extractable data leads to rejection of our null hypothesis, but analysis of a small sub-group of reliable evidence does not support that rejection. Reliable evidence is lacking in condition-specific meta-analyses, precluding relevant conclusions. Better designed and more rigorous RCTs are needed in order to develop an evidence base that can decisively provide reliable effect estimates of non-individualised homeopathic treatment.
Related Links	https://systematicreviewsjournal.biomedcentral.com/counter/pdf/10.1186/s13643-017-0445-3.pdf
Ending Page	28
Page Count	28
Starting Page	1
File Format	HTM / HTML
ISSN	20464053
DOI	10.1186/s13643-017-0445-3
Journal	Systematic Reviews
Issue Number	1
Volume Number	6
Language	English
Publisher	BioMed Central
Publisher Date	2017-03-24
Access Restriction	Open
Subject Keyword	Medicine Public Health Biomedicine Statistics for Life Sciences Health Sciences Non-individualised homeopathy Meta-analysis Randomised controlled trials Sensitivity analysis Systematic review Medicine/Public Health
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Article
Subject	Medicine
Journal Impact Factor	6.3/2023
5-Year Journal Impact Factor	4.5/2023

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Randomised placebo-controlled trials of individualised homeopathic treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised, Other-than-Placebo Controlled, Trials of Non-Individualised Homeopathic Treatment.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised, Other-than-Placebo Controlled, Trials of Individualised Homeopathic Treatment.

Randomised placebo-controlled trials of individualised homeopathic treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis

Efficacy of homoeopathic treatment: Systematic review of meta-analyses of randomised placebo-controlled homoeopathy trials for any indication

Homeopathy for Depression - DEP-HOM: study protocol for a randomized, partially double-blind, placebo controlled, four armed study

Participant retention in paediatric randomised controlled trials published in six major journals 2015–2019: systematic review and meta-analysis

Homeopathic aggravations: a systematic review of randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trials

The magnitude and temporal changes of response in the placebo arm of surgical randomized controlled trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of non-individualised homeopathic treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis

Similar Documents

Randomised placebo-controlled trials of individualised homeopathic treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised, Other-than-Placebo Controlled, Trials of Non-Individualised Homeopathic Treatment.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised, Other-than-Placebo Controlled, Trials of Individualised Homeopathic Treatment.

Randomised placebo-controlled trials of individualised homeopathic treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis

Efficacy of homoeopathic treatment: Systematic review of meta-analyses of randomised placebo-controlled homoeopathy trials for any indication

Homeopathy for Depression - DEP-HOM: study protocol for a randomized, partially double-blind, placebo controlled, four armed study

Participant retention in paediatric randomised controlled trials published in six major journals 2015–2019: systematic review and meta-analysis

Homeopathic aggravations: a systematic review of randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trials

The magnitude and temporal changes of response in the placebo arm of surgical randomized controlled trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of non-individualised homeopathic treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis