ArticleMedicine, health care, and philosophy2013
Plausibility and evidence: the case of homeopathy.
Article in Medicine, health care, and philosophy, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Homeopathy for COVID-19 in primary care: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (COVID-Simile study).Journal of integrative medicine · 2022Trial
- Characterisation of Aqueous Ultra-high Homeopathic Potencies: Nanoparticle Tracking Analysis.Homeopathy : the journal of the Faculty of Homeopathy · 2025Article
- Findings from a three-round Delphi study: essential topics for interprofessional training on complementary and integrative medicine.BMC complementary medicine and therapies · 2020Article
- How do medical students engaging in elective courses on acupuncture and homeopathy differ from unselected students? A survey.BMC complementary and alternative medicine · 2017Article
- Usage and Attitudes Towards Natural Remedies and Homeopathy in General Pediatrics: A Cross-Country Overview.Global pediatric health · 2016Article
- Differences in Median Ultraviolet Light Transmissions of Serial Homeopathic Dilutions of Copper Sulfate, Hypericum perforatum, and Sulfur.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2013Article
- Experimental neuropharmacology of Gelsemium sempervirens: Recent advances and debated issues.Journal of Ayurveda and integrative medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Homeopathy is controversial and hotly debated. The conclusions of systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials of homeopathy vary from 'comparable to conventional medicine' to 'no evidence of effects beyond placebo'. It is claimed that homeopathy conflicts with scientific laws and that homoeopaths reject the naturalistic outlook, but no evidence has been cited. We are homeopathic physicians and researchers who do not reject the scientific outlook; we believe that examination of the prior beliefs underlying this enduring stand-off can advance the debate. We show that interpretations of the same set of evidence--for homeopathy and for conventional medicine--can diverge. Prior disbelief in homeopathy is rooted in the perceived implausibility of any conceivable mechanism of action. Using the 'crossword analogy', we demonstrate that plausibility bias impedes assessment of the clinical evidence. Sweeping statements about the scientific impossibility of homeopathy are themselves unscientific: scientific statements must be precise and testable. There is growing evidence that homeopathic preparations can exert biological effects; due consideration of such research would reduce the influence of prior beliefs on the assessment of systematic review evidence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22539134What 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.