Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37967089›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2023

Randomised controlled trial to compare efficacy of standard care alone and in combination with homoeopathic treatment of moderate/severe COVID-19 cases.

Harleen Kaur, Ramesh Bawaskar, Akash Khobragade, Dhiraj Kalra, Vedati Packiam, Mohammed Yamin Khan, Twinkle Kaur, Manish Sharma, Naval Kumar Verma, Subhash Kaushik and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Harleen KaurCentral Council for Research in Homoeopathy, Ministry of AYUSH, Govt. of India, Janakpuri, New Delhi, India.ORCID 0000-0002-3864-6371
Ramesh BawaskarRegional Research Institute for Homoeopathy, Kharghar, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.ORCID 0000-0002-4116-3768
Akash KhobragadeSt. George's Hospital, Fort, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Dhiraj KalraY.M.T. Dental College and Hospital, Kharghar, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Vedati PackiamRejoice Health Foundation, New Delhi, India.
Mohammed Yamin KhanRegional Research Institute for Homoeopathy, Kharghar, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Twinkle KaurRegional Research Institute for Homoeopathy, Kharghar, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Manish SharmaRegional Research Institute for Homoeopathy, Kharghar, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Naval Kumar VermaRejoice Health Foundation, New Delhi, India.
Subhash KaushikCentral Council for Research in Homoeopathy, Ministry of AYUSH, Govt. of India, Janakpuri, New Delhi, India.
Anil KhuranaCentral Council for Research in Homoeopathy, Ministry of AYUSH, Govt. of India, Janakpuri, New Delhi, India.
Ministry of AYUSH · INPublic Health Foundation of India · INDr D Y Patil Dental College & Hospital · INSt. George Hospital · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND &

objectivesNo definite treatment is known for COVID-19 till date. The objective of this study is to assess the efficacy of customized Homoeopathic medicines, when used as an add-on treatment to Standard of Care (SOC), in patients suffering from moderate to severe COVID-19 infection.

methodsThis was a randomized, controlled, single-blind, parallel-group trial where 214 COVID19-positive patients were screened for moderate and severe cases of COVID-19. Adjuvant homoeopathic medicines were given in the treatment group and SOC was given to both groups. The duration of oxygen support was compared as the primary outcome. Subjects were followed for 28 days or till the end-point of mechanical ventilation/ death.

resultsOf 129 subjects included, 57 and 55 were severe; and 8 and 9 were moderate cases in Homoeopathy and SOC arms, respectively. In all, 9 (15.2%) participants in Homoeopathy and 20 (32.2%) participants in SOC arms eventually expired (p<0.05). Oxygen support was required for 9.84±7.00 and 14.92±7.549 days in Homoeopathy and SOC arms, respectively (p<0.005). Subjects receiving Homoeopathy (12.9±6.days) had a shorter hospitalization stay than in SOC (14.9±7.5 days). Homoeopathy arm (10.6±5.7 days) also showed statistically significant mean conversion time of of Realtime-Polymerase Chain Reaction (RT-PCR) from positive to negative than the SOC arm (12.9±5.6 days). The mean score of Clinical Outcome Ordinal Scale (COOS) was lower in the Homoeopathy arm. Laboratory markers [Interleukins (IL)-6, C-reactive protein (CRP), Neutrophils-Lymphocytes ratio (NLR)]were normalized earlier in Homoeopathy arm.

conclusionHomoeopathy, as add-on therapy with SOC for COVID-19 management, demonstrates a reduction in mortality and morbidity, by reduced requirement of oxygen and hospitalization. Some laboratory markers are normalized at an earlier time. Hence, there is overall control over the disease. Registry: The study was registered on the http://ctri.nic.in/Clinicaltrials website under identifier number: CTRI/2020/12/029668 on 9th December 2020.

Indexed as

COVID-19HomeopathyBiomarkersHumansOxygenSARS-CoV-2Single-Blind MethodTreatment OutcomeBiomarkersOxygen

Identifiers

PMID37967089
PMCPMC10650991
OpenAlexW4388699348

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.