Probabilistic Reasoning in Homeopathy Practice and its Implications for Clinical Research

Abstract

The principle of similitude put forward by Hahnemann has challenging practical consequences in the selection of the right homeopathic medicine for a patient. According to this principle, only the medicines that best fit the totality of the symptoms of a given patient are supposed to really cure: this greatly depends on the homeopath's clinical analysis. In addition, a patient's illness may be more or less curable, depending on the characteristics of the disease. In their daily practice, homeopaths typically apply Bayesian reasoning to deal with uncertainty associated with both medicine and disease. We suggest that clinical research on homeopathy would gain by integrating this kind of prior estimation of (1) the probability of a given medicine being effective for that particular patient and (2) the probability of the patient's disease (or symptoms) being curable. We therefore suggest that future trials of N-of-1 design may gain (1) by testing a small number of “best candidate” medicines (instead of one) for a given patient facing a given disease, and (2) by including careful prior estimations of the probabilities that (a) each selected medicine will be efficient for that patient and (b) the patient's disease will be reversible with the medicine.

Keywords

Bayesian statistics - probabilistic reasoning - similitude principle - single-case experimental design - methodology

Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 23. Mai 2023

Angenommen: 17. Juli 2023

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
31. Oktober 2023

• References

• 1 Hahnemann S. Organon of Medicine. 6th ed.. Los Angeles: J.P. Tarcher; ; Kunzli J, Naude A, Pendleton P, transl.; 1982: 270
• 2 Hahnemann S. The Chronic Diseases; Their Specific Nature and Homoeopathic Treatment. Radde; 1846: 432
• 3 Kent JT. Lectures on Homoeopathic Philosophy. Chicago, IL: Memorial Edition; 1919
• 4 Patel RP. Dr. Kent's 12 Observations & Dr. Hahnemann's Observations. “Remedy Reactions” Who Observed First? When, How and Why? Any Solutions?. Adv Homeopath Res 2019; 4: 32-37
• 5 Dale AI. Bayes or Laplace? An examination of the origin and early applications of Bayes' theorem. Arch Hist Exact Sci 1982; 27: 23-47
• 6 Rutten LA, Mathie RT, Manchanda RK. Making sense of prior probabilities in research. Trends Mol Med 2014; 20: 599-600
• 7 Rutten LALB. Flawed statistics and science confirming existing paradigms. J Eval Clin Pract 2018; 24: 1273-1276
• 8 Teut M, van Haselen RA, Rutten L, Lamba CD, Bleul G, Ulbrich-Zürni S. Case reporting in homeopathy—an overview of guidelines and scientific tools. Homeopathy 2022; 111: 2-9
• 9 Bagchi S, Nayak C, Rutten L. et al. Assessment of likelihood ratio for four contact dermatitis symptoms of vinca minor. Homeopathy 2018; 107: 209-217
• 10 Miglani A, Rutten L, Manchanda RK. Generalisability of prognostic factor research: further analysis of data from the IIPCOS2 study. Homeopathy 2017; 106: 155-159
• 11 Swayne J. International Dictionary of Homeopathy: International Dictionary of Homeopathy. 1st edition.. Edinburgh; New York: Churchill Livingstone; 2000: 280
• 12 de Schepper L. Achieving and Maintaining the Simillimum. USA: 1995: 370
• 13 Saha S, Koley M, Arya JS. et al. Hering's Law Assessment Tool revisited: introducing a modified novel version—Patients' Response Assessment Tool after Homeopathic Treatment (PRATHoT) in chronic cases. J Evid Based Complementary Altern Med 2014; 19: 260-266
• 14 Stub T, Alraek T, Salamonsen A. The Red flag! risk assessment among medical homeopaths in Norway: a qualitative study. BMC Complement Altern Med 2012; 12: 150
• 15 Stub T, Musial F, Kristoffersen AA, Alræk T, Liu J. Adverse effects of homeopathy, what do we know? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Complement Ther Med 2016; 26: 146-163
• 16 Jonas WB, Anderson RL, Crawford CC, Lyons JS. A systematic review of the quality of homeopathic clinical trials. BMC Complement Altern Med 2001; 1: 12
• 17 Shang A, Huwiler-Müntener K, Nartey L. et al. Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy. Lancet 2005; 366 (9487) 726-732
• 18 Sigurdson MK, Sainani KL, Ioannidis JPA. Homeopathy can offer empirical insights on treatment effects in a null field. J Clin Epidemiol 2023; 155: 64-72
• 19 Mathie RT, 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
• 20 Brulé D, Balon J, Zhao L, Seely D. An N-of-1 feasibility study of homeopathic treatment for fatigue in patients receiving chemotherapy. Homeopathy 2018; 107: 196-201
• 21 Ulbrich-Zürni S, Teut M, Roll S, Mathie RT. The N-of-1 clinical trial: a timely research opportunity in homeopathy. Homeopathy 2018; 107: 10-18
• 22 Banerjee K, Mathie RT, Costelloe C, Howick J. Homeopathy for allergic rhinitis: a systematic review. J Altern Complement Med 2017; 23: 426-444
• 23 Mathie RT, Fok YYY, Viksveen P, To AKL, Davidson JRT. Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised, other-than-placebo controlled, trials of non-individualised homeopathic treatment. Homeopathy 2019; 108: 88-101
• 24 Mathie RT, Ramparsad N, Legg LA. et al. Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of non-individualised homeopathic treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis. Syst Rev 2017; 6: 63
• 25 Mathie RT, Frye J, Fisher P. Homeopathic Oscillococcinum® for preventing and treating influenza and influenza-like illness. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; 1: CD001957
• 26 Lamba CD, Gupta VK, van Haselen R. et al. Evaluation of the Modified Naranjo Criteria for assessing causal attribution of clinical outcome to homeopathic intervention as presented in case reports. Homeopathy 2020; 109: 191-197
• 27 van Haselen RA. Homeopathic clinical case reports: development of a supplement (HOM-CASE) to the CARE clinical case reporting guideline. Complement Ther Med 2016; 25: 78-85
• 28 McGlynn EA, Asch SM, Adams J. et al. The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States. N Engl J Med 2003; 348: 2635-2645
• 29 Godlee F. Applying research evidence to individual patients. Evidence based case reports will help. BMJ 1998; 316 (7145) 1621-1622
• 30 Tate RL, McDonald S, Perdices M, Togher L, Schultz R, Savage S. Rating the methodological quality of single-subject designs and n-of-1 trials: introducing the Single-Case Experimental Design (SCED) Scale. Neuropsychol Rehabil 2008; 18: 385-401
• 31 Association Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition: DSM-5. 5 ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Publishing; 2013: 991
• 32 Hoa JHB. The similimum and Hahnemann's delayed reaction. Br Homeopath J 1979; 68: 50-55
• 33 Bagot JL. The specific characteristics of a homeopathic consultation. Rev Homéopathie 2018; 9: e17-e22
• 34 Kennedy SH, Lam RW, McIntyre RS. et al. Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) 2016 clinical guidelines for the management of adults with major depressive disorder: Section 3. Pharmacological treatments. Can J Psychiatry 2016; 61: 540-560
• 35 Trivedi MH, Rush AJ, Wisniewski SR. et al. Evaluation of outcomes with citalopram for depression using measurement-based care in STAR*D: implications for clinical practice. Am J Psychiatry 2006; 163: 28-40
• 36 Pigott HE. The STAR*D trial: it is time to reexamine the clinical beliefs that guide the treatment of major depression. Can J Psychiatry 2015; 60: 9-13
• 37 National Centre for Health and Care Excellence. Depression in adults: treatment and management. Guidance: Recommendations. Accessed May 18, 2023, at: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng222/chapter/recommendations#starting-antidepressant-medication