Faculty of Homeopathy (2015).Research in homeopathy.
______
Mathie RT, Lloyd SM, Legg LA, Clausen J, Moss S, Davidson JRT, Ford I (2014). Randomised placebo-controlled trials of individualised homeopathic treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis. Systematic Reviews; 3: 142.
Title: A systematic review of systematic reviews of homeopathy
Citation: British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 2002, vol./is. 54/6(577-582), 0306-5251 (2002)
Author(s): Ernst E.
Language: English
Abstract: Homeopathy remains one of the most controversial subjects in therapeutics. This article is an attempt to clarify its effectiveness based on recent systematic reviews. Electronic databases were searched for systematic reviews/meta-analysis on the subject. Seventeen articles fulfilled the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Six of them related to re-analyses of one landmark meta-analysis. Collectively they implied that the overall positive result of this meta-analysis is not supported by a critical analysis of the data. Eleven independent systematic reviews were located. Collectively they failed to provide strong evidence in favour of homeopathy. In particular, there was no condition which responds convincingly better to homeopathic treatment than to placebo or other control interventions. Similarly, there was no homeopathic remedy that was demonstrated to yield clinical effects that are convincingly different from placebo. It is concluded that the best clinical evidence for homeopathy available to date does not warrant positive recommendations for its use in clinical practice.
Publication Type: Journal: Review
Source: EMBASE
Full Text:
Available from EBSCOhost in British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
Title: Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? A meta-analysis of placebo-controlled trials.
Citation: Lancet, 1997, vol./is. 350/9081(834-843), 00995355
Author(s): Linde K, Clausius N, Ramirez G, Melchart D, Eitel F, Hedges LV, Jonas WB
Language: English
Publication Type: Academic Journal
Source: CINAHL
Full Text:
Available from EBSCOhost in Lancet
Title: Adverse effects of homeopathy: a systematic review of published case reports and case series.
Citation: International Journal of Clinical Practice, 2012, vol./is. 66/12(1178-1188), 13685031
Author(s): Posadzki P, Alotaibi A, Ernst E
Language: English
Abstract: Aim: The aim of this systematic review was to critically evaluate the evidence regarding the adverse effects (AEs) of homeopathy. Method: Five electronic databases were searched to identify all relevant case reports and case series. Results: In total, 38 primary reports met our inclusion criteria. Of those, 30 pertained to direct AEs of homeopathic remedies; and eight were related to AEs caused by the substitution of conventional medicine with homeopathy. The total number of patients who experienced AEs of homeopathy amounted to 1159. Overall, AEs ranged from mild-to-severe and included four fatalities. The most common AEs were allergic reactions and intoxications. Rhustoxidendron was the most frequently implicated homeopathic remedy. Conclusion: Homeopathy has the potential to harm patients and consumers in both direct and indirect ways. Clinicians should be aware of its risks and advise their patients accordingly.
Publication Type: Academic Journal
Source: CINAHL
Full Text:
Available from EBSCOhost in International Journal of Clinical Practice