Download PDF
Homeopathy 2017; 106(04): 194-202
DOI: 10.1016/j.homp.2017.07.003
Original Paper
Copyright © The Faculty of Homeopathy 2017

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

Robert T. Mathie
1   Homeopathy Research Institute, 142 Cromwell Road, London SW7 4EF, UK
,
Michel Van Wassenhoven
2   Belgian Homeopathic Medicines Registration Committee, FAMHP (Federal Agency for Medicines and Health Products), Belgium
,
A.L.B. Lex Rutten
3   Independent Researcher
,
Christien T. Klein-Laansma
4   Department Nutrition & Health, Louis Bolk Institute, Driebergen, The Netherlands
,
José Eizayaga
5   Department of Homeopathy, Maimonides University, Buenos Aires, Argentina
,
Anna Pla i Castellsagué
6   Research Sub-committee, European Committee for Homeopathy, Belgium
,
Miek C. Jong
4   Department Nutrition & Health, Louis Bolk Institute, Driebergen, The Netherlands
7   Department of Health Sciences, Mid-Sweden University, Sundsvall, Sweden
8   National Information and Knowledge Centre for Integrative Medicine, The Netherlands
,
Raj K. Manchanda
9   Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy, India
,
Flávio Dantas
10   Faculty of Medicine, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, Brazil
,
Menachem Oberbaum
11   Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
,
Joyce Frye
12   Center for Integrative Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
,
Helmut Roniger
13   Royal London Hospital for Integrated Medicine, London, UK
,
Stephan Baumgartner
14   Institute of Integrative Medicine, University of Witten-Herdecke, Germany
,
Robbert van Haselen
15   International Institute for Integrated Medicine, Kingston, UK
,
Ton Nicolai
3   Independent Researcher
,
Peter Fisher
13   Royal London Hospital for Integrated Medicine, London, UK
› Author Affiliations
Subject Editor:
Further Information

Publication History

Received01 February 2017
revised23 June 2017

accepted31 July 2017

Publication Date:
02 January 2018 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

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.

Highlights

• The study appraised model validity of homeopathic treatment (MVHT).

• The sample comprised 26 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of non-individualised homeopathy that were ‘not at high risk of bias’.

• MVHT and risk of bias rating per trial were merged to obtain a single overall quality designation (‘high’, ‘moderate’, ‘low’).

• The 26 trials were designated overall as: ‘high quality’ (N = 1); ‘moderate quality’ (N = 18); ‘low quality’ (N = 7).

• Only one study was designated ‘high quality’ overall (‘acceptable MVHT’ and ‘reliable evidence’).

Keywords

Model validity - Non-individualised homeopathy - Randomised placebo-controlled trials - Risk of bias - Systematic review

 

  • References

  • 1 Verhoef M.J., Lewith G., Ritenbaugh C., Boon H., Fleishman S., Leis A. Complementary and alternative whole systems research: beyond identification of inadequacies of the RCT. Complement Ther Med 2005; 13: 206-212.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Bornhöft G., Maxion-Bergemann S., Wolf U. et al. Checklist for the qualitative evaluation of clinical studies with particular focus on external validity and model validity. BMC Med Res Methodol 2006; 6: 56
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Mathie R.T., Roniger H., Van Wassenhoven M. et al. Method for appraising model validity of randomised controlled trials of homeopathic treatment: multi-rater concordance study. BMC Med Res Methodol 2012; 12: 49
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Mathie R.T., Lloyd S.M., Legg L.A. et al. Randomised placebo-controlled trials of individualised homeopathic treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis. Syst Rev 2014; 3: 142
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Mathie R.T., Van Wassenhoven M., Jacobs J. et al. Model validity of randomised placebo-controlled trials of individualised homeopathic treatment. Homeopathy 2015; 104: 164-169.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Mathie R.T., Van Wassenhoven M., Jacobs J. et al. Model validity and risk of bias in randomised placebo-controlled trials of individualised homeopathic treatment. Complement Ther Med 2016; 25: 120-125.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Mathie R.T., Hacke D., Clausen J., Nicolai T., Riley D.S., Fisher P. Randomised controlled trials of homeopathy in humans: characterising the research journal literature for systematic review. Homeopathy 2013; 102: 3-24.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Swayne J. International dictionary of homeopathy. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 2000.
    Google Scholar
  • 9 Mathie R.T., Ramparsad N., Legg L.A. et al. Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of non-individualised homeopathic treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis. Syst Rev 2017; 6: 63
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Baker D.G., Myers S.P., Howden I., Brooks L. The effects of homeopathic Argentum nitricum on test anxiety. Complement Ther Med 2003; 11: 65-71 [Systematic review programme number A47]
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Balzarini A., Felisi E., Martini A., De Conno F. Efficacy of homeopathic treatment of skin reactions during radiotherapy for breast cancer: a randomized, double-blind clinical trial. Br Homeopath J 2000; 89: 8-12 [A48]
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Colau J.C., Vincent S., Marijnen P., Allaert F.A. Efficacy of a non-hormonal treatment, BRN-01, on menopausal hot flashes: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Drugs R D 2012; 12: 107-119 [A272]
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Cornu C., Joseph P., Gaillard S. et al. No effect of a homeopathic combination of Arnica montana and Bryonia alba on bleeding, inflammation, and ischaemia after aortic valve surgery. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2010; 69: 136-142 [A61]
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Diefenbach M., Schilken J., Steiner G., Becker H.J. Homöopathische Therapie bei Erkrankungen der Atemwege. Auswertung einer klinischen Studie bei 258 Patienten. [Homeopathic therapy in respiratory tract diseases. Evaluation of a clinical study in 258 patients]. Z Allgemeinmed 1997; 73: 308-314 [A62]
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Ferley J.P., Zmirou D., D'Adhemar D., Balducci F. A controlled evaluation of a homeopathic preparation in the treatment of influenza like syndromes. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1989; 27: 329-335 [A64]
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Frass M., Dielacher C., Linkesch M. et al. Influence of potassium dichromate on tracheal secretions in critically ill patients. Chest 2005; 127: 936-941 [A67]
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 GRECHO (Groupe de Recherches et d'Essais Cliniques en Homéopathie). Evaluation de deux produits homéopathiques sur la reprise du transit après chirurgie digestive – Un essai contrôlé multicentrique. [Evaluation of the effects of two homeopathic preparations on the resumption of intestinal peristalsis after digestive tract surgery – a multicentre controlled trial]. Presse Med 1989; 18: 59-62 [A75]
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Hofmeyr G.J., Piccioni V., Blauhof P. Postpartum homeopathic Arnica montana: a potency-finding pilot study. Br J Clin Pract 1990; 44: 619-621 [A79]
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Kaziro G.S. Metronidazole (Flagyl) and Arnica montana in the prevention of post-surgical complications, a comparative placebo controlled clinical trial. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1984; 22: 42-49 [A83]
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Leaman A.M., Gorman D. Cantharis in the early treatment of minor burns. Arch Emerg Med 1989; 6: 259-261 [A92]
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Lewith G., Watkins A.D., Hyland M.E. Use of ultramolecular potencies of allergen to treat asthmatic people allergic to house dust mite: double blind randomized controlled clinical trial. Br Med J 2002; 324: 520-523 [A93]
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Malapane E., Solomon E.M., Pellow J. Efficacy of a homeopathic complex on acute viral tonsillitis. J Altern Complement Med 2014; 20: 868-873 [A292]
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Naidoo P., Pellow J. A randomized placebo-controlled pilot study of Cat saliva 9cH and Histaminum 9cH in cat allergic adults. Homeopathy 2013; 102: 123-129 [A290]
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Oberbaum M., Yaniv I., Ben-Gal Y. et al. A randomized, controlled clinical trial of the homeopathic medication TRAUMEEL S® in the treatment of chemotherapy-induced stomatitis in children undergoing stem cell transplantation. Cancer 2001; 92: 684-690 [A100]
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Padilha R.Q., Riera R., Atallah Á.N. Homeopathic Plumbum metallicum for lead poisoning: a randomized clinical trial. Homeopathy 2011; 100: 116-121 [A103]
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Papp R., Schuback G., Beck E. et al. OscillococcinumR in patients with influenza-like syndromes: a placebo-controlled double-blind evaluation. Br Homoeopath J 1998; 87: 69-76 [A104]
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Paris A., Gonnet N., Chaussard C. et al. Effect of homeopathy on analgesic intake following knee ligament reconstruction: a phase III monocentre randomized placebo controlled study. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2008; 65: 180-187 [A105]
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Reilly D., Taylor M.A., Beattie N.G.M. et al. Is evidence for homeopathy reproducible?. Lancet 1994; 344: 1601-1606 [A112]
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Singer S.R., Amit-Kohn M., Weiss S. et al. Traumeel S® for pain relief following hallux valgus surgery: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Clin Pharmacol 2010; 10: 9 [A120]
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Taylor M.A., Reilly D., Llewellyn-Jones R.H., McSharry C., Aitchison T.C. Randomised controlled trial of homeopathy versus placebo in perennial allergic rhinitis with overview of four trial series. Br Med J 2000; 321: 471-476 [A123]
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Tveiten D., Bruseth S., Borchgrevink C.F., Løhne K. Effekt av Arnica D 30 ved hard fysisk anstrengelse. En doppeltblind randomisert undersøkelse under Oslo maraton 1990. [Effect of Arnica D30 on hard physical exertion. A double-blind randomized trial during the 1990 Oslo Marathon]. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 1991; 111: 3630-3631 [A125]
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Tveiten D., Bruseth S., Borchgrevink C.F., Norseth J. Effects of the homeopathic remedy Arnica D30 on marathon runners: a randomized, double-blind study during the 1995 Oslo Marathon. Complement Ther Med 1998; 6: 71-74 [A126]
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Vickers A.J., Fisher P., Smith C., Wyllie S.E., Rees R. Homeopathic Arnica 30X is ineffective for muscle soreness after long-distance running: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Clin J Pain 1998; 14: 227-231 [A128]
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Wiesenauer M., Lüdtke R. The treatment of pollinosis with Galphimia glauca D4 – a randomized placebo-controlled double-blind clinical trial. Phytomedicine 1995; 2: 3-6 [A135]
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Zabolotnyi D.I., Kneis K.C., Richardson A. et al. Efficacy of a complex homeopathic medication (Sinfrontal) in patients with acute maxillary sinusitis: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter clinical trial. Explore (NY) 2007; 3: 98-109 [A137]
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Higgins JPT, Altman DG (eds). Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in included studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (eds). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions; Version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011.
    PubMed
  • 37 Schünemann H.J., Oxman A.D., Vist G.E. et al. Chapter 12: Interpreting results and drawing conclusions. In: Higgins J.P.T., Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions; Version 5.1.0. 2011. The Cochrane Collaboration;
    Google Scholar
  • 38 El Dib R.P., Atallah Á.N., Andriolo R.B. Mapping the Cochrane evidence for decision making in health care. J Eval Clin Pract 2007; 13: 689-692.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar