Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34009440›Full record

ArticleHNO2021

[Homeopathy-a therapeutic option for medical practice? : An evaluation from the perspective of evidence-based medicine].

Christian W Lübbers, Udo Endruscheit

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in HNO, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Homeopathy-A lively relic of the prescientific era.Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
    2021
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Christian W LübbersHNO Weilheim, Pöltnerstraße 22, 82362, Weilheim, Deutschland. c.luebbers@hno-weilheim.de.
Udo Endruscheit, Krayer Straße 227, 45307, Essen, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many publications declare homeopathy to be "controversial." However, based on the findings of extensive research on homeopathy, there has long been a broad scientific consensus that there is no reliable evidence of specific medical effectiveness. Overall, the evidence clearly denies effects beyond those of placebo and context. All the more must it be seen as a phenomenon that homeopathy is still the subject of medical and therapeutic practice. This may lie largely in the fact that the homeopathic scene appropriates medical research and the concept of evidence in a way that is suitable to maintain the appearance that there is still a scientifically relevant discourse to dispute. The following article aims to justify that this is not the case, and that homeopathy is, therefore, obsolete as a therapeutic option, even according to the principles of contemporary medical ethics.

Indexed as

HomeopathyEvidence-Based MedicineHealth care quality assuranceMedical ethicsPlacebo effectProfessional ethicsSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID34009440
PMCPMC8316206

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.