SynthesisEuropean journal of clinical pharmacology2004
Homotoxicology--a review of randomised clinical trials.
Synthesis in European journal of clinical pharmacology, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Homotoxicological remedies versus desmopressin versus placebo in the treatment of enuresis: a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial.Pediatric nephrology (Berlin, Germany) · 2008Trial
- Effect of an Ultra-Diluted Complex on Health, Growth Performance, and Blood Parameters of Pre-Weaned Dairy Calves.Veterinary sciences · 2025Article
- Homeopathy for Rheumatological Diseases: A Systematic Review.European journal of rheumatology · 2024Review
- Publication bias in complementary and conventional medicine.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2005Article
- A review of randomised clinical trials.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2005Article
- Reply to EJCP 2004-0275 and 2004-0350.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2005Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimHomotoxicology is a form of therapy that uses homoeopathically diluted remedies with a view of eliminating toxins from the body. It is not a therapeutic method based on accepted scientific principles or biological plausibility. Yet numerous clinical studies have claimed efficacy. The aim of this systematic review is to summarise and critically evaluate the evidence from rigorous clinical trials of this form of therapy.
methodsSeven electronic databases were searched for all studies of homotoxicological medicines for any human condition. To be included, trials had to be randomised and placebo-controlled. Data from such studies were validated and extracted according to pre-defined criteria. Their methodological quality was formally assessed using the Jadad score. Key data of all included trials were tabulated and summarised in narrative form.
resultsSeven trials met our inclusion criteria. Their Jadad scores indicated mostly a high methodological standard. The trials tested the efficacy of seven different medicines for seven different indications. The results were positive in all but one study. Important flaws were found in all trials. These render the results of the primary studies less reliable than their high Jadad scores might suggest.
conclusionDespite mostly positive findings and high ratings on the Jadad score, the placebo-controlled, randomised clinical trials of homotoxicology fail to demonstrate the efficacy of this therapeutic approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
15197516What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.