Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39425766›Full record

Trial reportEuropean journal of pediatrics2024

Homoeopathy vs. conventional primary care in children during the first 24 months of life-a pragmatic randomised controlled trial.

Menachem Oberbaum, Anupriya Chaudhary, Hima Bindu Ponnam, Reetha Krishnan, Dinesh V Kumar, Mohammed Irfan, Debadatta Nayak, Swati Pandey, Akula Archana, Sai Bhargavi and 7 more

RetractedAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled TrialRetracted Publication
In one paragraph

Trial report in European journal of pediatrics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors.

Menachem Oberbaum *Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel. menachem@oberbaums.com.
Anupriya Chaudhary *Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy, Ministry of AYUSH, New Delhi, India.
Hima Bindu PonnamRegional Research Institute (Homoeopathy), Hyderabad, India.
Reetha KrishnanDepartment of Homoeopathy, Ariv Integrative Healthcare, Yashoda Hospital, Somajiguda, Hyderabad, India.
Dinesh V KumarBasavatarakam Indo-American Cancer Hospital & Research Institute, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
Mohammed IrfanDepartment of Paediatrics, JIMS Homoeopathic Medical College & Hospital, Shamshabad, Telangana, India.
Debadatta NayakCentral Council for Research in Homoeopathy, Ministry of AYUSH, New Delhi, India.
Swati PandeyCentral Council for Research in Homoeopathy, Ministry of AYUSH, New Delhi, India.
Akula ArchanaDepartment of Health & Family Welfare, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.
Sai BhargaviFormerly at JIMS Homoeopathic Medical College & Hospital, Shamshabad, Telangana, India.
Divya TanejaCentral Council for Research in Homoeopathy, Ministry of AYUSH, New Delhi, India.
Mohua DattaCentral Council for Research in Homoeopathy, Ministry of AYUSH, New Delhi, India.
Navin PawaskarJIMS Healthcare, Shamshabad, Telangana, India.
Ravindra Mohan PandeyFormerly at Department of Biostatistics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Ansari Nagar, New Delhi, India.
Anil KhuranaCentral Council for Research in Homoeopathy, Ministry of AYUSH, New Delhi, India.
Shepherd Roee Singer *Division of Epidemiology, Ministry of Health, Jerusalem, Israel.
Raj Kumar Manchanda *Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy, Ministry of AYUSH, New Delhi, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To compare the difference between primary homoeopathic and conventional paediatric care in treating acute illnesses in children in their first 24 months of life. One hundred eight Indian singleton newborns delivered at 37 to 42 weeks gestation were randomised at birth (1:1) to receive either homoeopathic or conventional primary care for any acute illness over the study period. In the homoeopathic group, conventional medical treatment was added when medically indicated. Clinicians and parents were unblinded. Children in the homoeopathic group experienced significantly fewer sick days than those in the conventional group (RR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.24-0.58; p < 0.001), with correspondingly fewer sickness episodes (RR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.32-0.87; p = .013), as well as fewer respiratory illnesses over the 24-month period. They were taller (F (1, 97) = 8.92, p = .004, partial eta squared = 0.84) but not heavier than their conventionally treated counterparts. They required fewer antibiotics, and their treatment cost was lower.

conclusionHomoeopathy, using conventional medicine as a safety backdrop, was more effective than conventional treatment in preventing sick days, sickness episodes, and respiratory illnesses in the first 24 months of life. It necessitated fewer antibiotics and its overall cost was lower. This study supports homoeopathy, using conventional medicine as a safety backdrop, as a safe and cost-effective primary care modality during the first 2 years of life.

trial registrationClinical Trial Registry-India (2018/09/015641). https://ctri.nic.in/Clinicaltrials/login.php What is Known: • Due to their holistic nature, many Complementary and Alternative Medical (CAM) modalities are not readily amenable to assessment by head-to-head RCT for a given Indication. • We propose a pragmatic, RCT comparing homoeopathic with conventional medicine as a system. WHAT IS NEW: • Homoeopathic was apparently superior to conventional primary care in preventing sick days, sickness episodes, and respiratory illness episodes and was significantly associated with growth in height but not weight and required fewer antibiotics in children from birth to 24 months of age.

Indexed as

HomeopathyPrimary Health CareChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansIndiaInfantInfant, NewbornMaleSick LeaveTreatment OutcomeAntimicrobial resistanceComplementary and alternative medicine (CAM)DiarrhoeaHomoeopathyInfant and toddler primary careRespiratory illness

Identifiers

PMID39425766
PMCPMC11527938

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.