ArticleFrontiers in allergy2025
Feasibility in a homeopathy for seasonal allergic rhinitis RCT: importance of therapeutic relationship and organizational capacity.
Article in Frontiers in allergy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) patients often use homeopathy for symptom relief. The HOMEOSAR trial, a randomized, placebo-controlled, triple-blind multicenter study, included a qualitative sub-study to assess feasibility. This sub-study specifically examined the feasibility of the study, focusing in particular on two mechanism-rich domains-the therapeutic relationship and study organization-with special attention to study procedures, physician-patient relationships, organizational aspects, and interactions with the study team. Methods: Semi-structured interviews with trial participants were conducted 6-8 weeks after baseline, corresponding to 2-4 weeks after study intervention ended. Data were coded, categorized, and analyzed using qualitative content analysis, both inductively from the material and deductively based on study aims. MAXQDA® software was used to support analysis. Results: Fifteen patients (mean age 43 years; range 20-67; 11 male) participated in the qualitative study ( Conclusion: Findings of this qualitative study provide design-level recommendations (e.g., upfront communication of consultation length, digital diaries with free-text, tracked medication shipping, single contact point) for RCT studies. Beyond the specific homeopathy study context, these findings offer important methodological insights for designing patient-centered RCTs in complex intervention settings not only in the field of Complementary and Integrative Medicine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.