Allgemeine Homöopathische Zeitung 2017; 262(02): 2-76
DOI: 10.1055/s-0037-1601125
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Validating the clinical predictive value of homeopathic provings – a pilot study comparing retrospectively collected proving and clinical data

Validierung des klinischen prädiktiven Wertes homöopathischer Prüfungen – eine Pilotstudie, in der retrospektiv erhobene Nachweise und klinische Daten verglichen werden

T Hoover
1   Homeopathic Pharmacopeia of the United States, Philadelphia, United States
R Van Haselen
1   Homeopathic Pharmacopeia of the United States, Philadelphia, United States
2   International Institute for Integrated Medicine, Strasbourg, France
J Frye
1   Homeopathic Pharmacopeia of the United States, Philadelphia, United States
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
21 March 2017 (online)


Homeopathic provings (also called homeopathic pathogenetic trials) are currently used by the Homeopathic Pharmacopeia Convention of the U.S. (HPCUS) to evaluate homeopathic drugs in the monograph review process. Provings originated in 1766 have been progressively updated to conform to modern standards for ethical and scientific conduct of human trials.

Provings are considered to be a primary data source to guide selection of a remedy for treatment. To date, no studies have formally examined the correlation between data obtained from provings and clinical effectiveness, when such data is used as a guide to select treatment.

This trial is a 2 year Retrospective Chart Review of patients (more than 150 cases) treated by a group of clinicians, using the Vithoulkas Compass System for homeopathic remedy selection and record-keeping. Collected data on treatment selection rubrics will be compared to data obtained from modern and historical provings of the same remedy.

The trial is designed to compare data obtained in provings to rubrics used in the selection of a homeopathic medicine with correlation to the reported effect from treatment. This preliminary study should yield information on the relevance of provings to clinical treatment choice and outcome, comparative data on historical and modern provings, and the value of particular rubrics to treatment outcome, using likelihood ratios. This information is relevant for clinical practice.


HPCUS, monograph process, regulation, approval of new homeopathic drugs and design for future homeopathic studies.

This study is financially supported by HPCUS.