Download PDF
Homeopathy 2002; 91(01): 10-17
DOI: 10.1054/homp.2001.0016
Original Paper
Copyright © The Faculty of Homeopathy 2002

A study of the inter-observer reliability of paper case analysis

M Aghadiuno
Glasgow Homeopathic Hospital, 1053 Great Western Road, Glasgow, G12 2QQ, UK
› Author Affiliations
Subject Editor:
Further Information

Publication History

Received29 November 2000
revised14 June 2001

accepted06 August 2001

Publication Date:
27 December 2017 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Two hundred homeopathic practitioners were each sent a questionnaire. The main body of the questionnaire requested the analysis of a paper case, with an optional second case. The response rate was disappointing at about 15%. There was consensus of 33% for the selection of the correct medicine in the analysis of the first case. The study was small but poses further questions about case analysis and the diverse interpretations of the law of similars.

Keywords

case analysis - paper case - simillimum - law of similars - inter-observer reliability
 

  • References

  • 1 Vithoulkas G. The Science of Homeopathy. New York: Grove Press; 1980. p. 3–8.
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Chibeni SS. On the scientific status of homeopathy. Br Hom J 2001; 90: 92-98.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Swayne J. (Ed) Churchill Livingstone's International Dictionary of Homeopathy. London: Churchill Livingstone; 2000.
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Hahnemann, S, Kunzli, JNaudé, APendleton, P, (eds). Organon of Medicine, Washington, Cooper Publishing, 1996, 10, 84, 179.
    PubMed
  • 5 Saine A. Homeopathy and Psychiatry. Eindhoven: Lutra Services; 1997.
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Watson I. A Guide to the Methodologies of Homeopathy. Kendal: Cutting Edge Publications; 1991. p. 90–91.
    Google Scholar
  • 7 Scholten J. Homeopathy and Minerals. Utrecht: Stiching Alonnissos; 1993. p. 23–25.
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Scholten J. Homeopathy and the Elements. Utrecht: Stiching Alonnissos; 1996. p. 12–69.
    Google Scholar
  • 9 Shore J. In: Ilse Bos. (ed). Seminar at Hapert. 1990. Ilse Boss; 18-416.
  • 10 Morrison R. In: Ilse Bos. (ed). Seminar at Burgh-Haamstede. 1987. Ilse Boss; 132-138.
  • 11 Morrison R. Methods of case analysis. J Am Inst Hom 1990; 83: 63-71.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Morrison R. Methods of case analysis. J Am Inst Hom 1990; 83: 118-125.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Morrison R. Methods of case analysis. J Am Inst Hom 1991; 84: 16-20.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Herscu P. Stramonium: with an Introduction to Analysis using Cycles and Segments. Amherst: New England School of Homoeopathy Press; 1996.
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Herscu P. Editorial. New England J Hom 1999; 8: 1-4.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Reichenberg-Ullman J, Castro M, Herscu P, Saine A. Case analysis roundtable: common threads of success. Simillimum 1996; 9: 22-41.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Bol A. Does conventional medical treatment have a scientific basis?. Hom Links 1996; 9: 221-223.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 John OP, Robins RW. Determinants of interjudge agreement on personality traits: the big five domains, observability, evaluativeness and the unique perspective of the self. J Personality 1993; 61: 521-551.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Eddy M, Clanton CH. The art of diagnosis: solving the clinicopathological exercise. N Eng J Med 1982; 306: 1263-1266.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Debats F. Finding a way to define homeopathy. Hom Links 1997; 10: 34-37.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Vithoulkas G. Homeopathy: art or science?. Hom Heritage 1995; 20: 301-304.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Norby JJ. Can we believe what we see, if we see what we believe? —expert disagreement. J Forensic Sci 1992; 37: 1115-1124.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar