Download PDF
Homeopathy 2014; 103(04): 219-223
DOI: 10.1016/j.homp.2014.07.001
Original Paper
Copyright © The Faculty of Homeopathy 2014

CORE-Hom: A powerful and exhaustive database of clinical trials in homeopathy

Jürgen Clausen
1   Karl und Veronica Carstens-Stiftung, Am Deimelsberg 36, 45276 Essen, Germany
,
Sian Moss
2   Homeopathy Research Institute, International House, 39 Great Windmill Street, Piccadilly, London, UK
,
Alexander Tournier
2   Homeopathy Research Institute, International House, 39 Great Windmill Street, Piccadilly, London, UK
,
Rainer Lüdtke
3   DSZ – Deutsches Stiftungszentrum GmbH, im Stifterverband für die Deutsche Wissenschaft, Barkhovenallee 1, 45239 Essen, Germany
,
Henning Albrecht
1   Karl und Veronica Carstens-Stiftung, Am Deimelsberg 36, 45276 Essen, Germany
› Author Affiliations
Subject Editor:
Further Information

Publication History

Received04 June 2014
revised11 July 2014

accepted15 July 2014

Publication Date:
28 December 2017 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

The CORE-Hom database was created to answer the need for a reliable and publicly available source of information in the field of clinical research in homeopathy. As of May 2014 it held 1048 entries of clinical trials, observational studies and surveys in the field of homeopathy, including second publications and re-analyses. 352 of the trials referenced in the database were published in peer reviewed journals, 198 of which were randomised controlled trials. The most often used remedies were Arnica montana (n = 103) and Traumeel® (n = 40). The most studied medical conditions were respiratory tract infections (n = 126) and traumatic injuries (n = 110). The aim of this article is to introduce the database to the public, describing and explaining the interface, features and content of the CORE-Hom database.

Keywords

Homeopathy - Clinical research - Database - Randomised controlled trials

Supplementary data

 

  • References

  • 1 Hektoen L. Review of the current involvement of homeopathy in veterinary practice and research. Vet Rec 157 (08) 20-8 2005; 224-229.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Baumgartner S. Reproductions and reproducibility in homeopathy: Dogma or tool?. J Altern Complement Med 11 (05) 2005; 771-772.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Shang A., Huwiler-Muntener K., Nartey L., Juni P., Dorig S., Sterne J.A. et al. Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy. Lancet 366 9487. 27-8 2005; 726-732.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Giles J., Butler D., Hopkin M., Sanderson K., Sigler S. Degrees in homeopathy slated as unscientific. Nature 446 7134 2007; 352-353.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Linde K., Clausius N., Ramirez G., Melchart D., Eitel F., Hedges L.V. et al. Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects?. Lancet 350 9081 1997; 834-843.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Rutten L., Stolper E. 'Proof' against homeopathy in fact supports Homeopathy. Homeopathy 95 (01) 2006; 57-61.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Rutten A.L., Stolper C.F. The 2005 meta-analysis of homeopathy: the importance of post-publication data. Homeopathy 97 (04) 2008; 169-177.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Thurneysen A. Open letter to the editor of The Lancet from the Swiss Association of Homoeopathic Physicians (SVHA). Homeopathy 95 (01) 2006; 61-62.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Linde K. Homöopathie - nichts als Plazebo?. Forsch Komplementmed 13 (01) 2006; 52-54.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Lüdtke R., Rutten A.L. The conclusions on the effectiveness of homeopathy highly depend on the set of analyzed trials. J Clin Epidemiol 61 (12) 2008; 1197-1204.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Mathie R.T., Hacke D., Clausen J. Randomised controlled trials of veterinary homeopathy: characterising the peer-reviewed research literature for systematic review. Homeopathy 101 (04) 2012; 196-203.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 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 102 (01) 2013; 3-24.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Ho R.C., Mak K.K., Tao R., Lu Y., Day J.R., Pan F. Views on the peer review system of biomedical journals: an online survey of academics from high-ranking universities. BMC Med Res Methodol 2013; 13: 74.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Carrell D.T., Rajpert-De M.E. Meaningful peer review is integral to quality science and should provide benefits to the authors and reviewers alike. Andrology 1 (04) 2013; 531-532.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Clausius N. Kontrollierte klinische Studien zur Homöopathie - Eine systematische Übersichtsarbeit mit Metaanalyse. Essen KVC Verl 1998; 1-156.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Dean M.E. The trials of homeopathy. Essen KVC Verl 2004; 1-308.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Pocock S.J., Simon R. Sequential treatment assignment with balancing for prognostic factors in the controlled clinical trial. Biometrics 31 (01) 1975; 103-115.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Han B., Enas N.H., McEntegart D. Randomization by minimization for unbalanced treatment allocation. Stat Med 28 (27) 30-11 2009; 3329-3346.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Jadad A.R., Moore R.A., Carroll D., Jenkinson C., Reynolds D.J., Gavaghan D.J. et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary?. Control Clin Trials 17 (01) 1996; 1-12.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar