Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42539590›Full record

Trial reportFrontiers in allergy2026

Homeopathic medication for seasonal allergic rhinitis-a randomised placebo-controlled trial.

J Siewert, H Cramer, M Ortiz, T Tissen-Diabaté, S Roll, K Wegscheider, K Linde, T Reinhold, S N Willich, M Teut and 1 more

Abstract readClinical Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Frontiers in allergy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

J SiewertInstitute of Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité - University Medical Center Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
H CramerInstitute of General Practice and Interprofessional Care, and Bosch Health Campus, Robert Bosch Centre for Integrative Medicine and Health, University Hospital Tübingen, Stuttgart, Germany.
M OrtizInstitute of Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité - University Medical Center Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
T Tissen-DiabatéInstitute of Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité - University Medical Center Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
S RollInstitute of Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité - University Medical Center Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
K WegscheiderInstitute of Medical Biometry and Epidemiology, University Medical Centre Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.
K LindeTUM School of Medicine and Health, Institute for General Practice and Health Services Research, Department of Clinical Medicine, Technical University Munich, Universität München, Munich, Germany.
T ReinholdInstitute of Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité - University Medical Center Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
S N WillichInstitute of Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité - University Medical Center Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
M Teut *Institute of Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité - University Medical Center Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
B Brinkhaus *Institute of Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité - University Medical Center Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The study aim was to evaluate the efficacy of homeopathic medication in SAR patients. Methods: In a double-blind, three-arm randomised trial, patients at eleven outpatient clinics and two medical centres were randomised to receive (1) individualised homeopathic case taking (IHCT) and standardised homeopathic medication with Galphimia Glauca (GG), (2) IHCT and individualised homeopathic treatment (IHG), or (3) IHCT and placebo (PG). Primary outcome was disease-specific quality of life, assessed using the Rhinitis Quality of Life Questionnaire (RQLQ) after three and four weeks. Secondary outcomes included response rate (≥0.5-point change in RQLQ), rescue medication use, and total nasal and non-nasal symptom scores (TNSS, TNNSS). Results: Sixty-two SAR patients (mean age ± SD: 46.9 ± 14.9; 43.5% female) were recruited, approximately 25% of the planned sample size. After weeks three and four, there were no significant differences in RQLQ ( Conclusion: Standardised and individualised homeopathic drugs were not superior compared to placebo suggesting that treatment response was not based on study medication. The validity of the study and its conclusions are limited by the fact that the recruitment target was not achieved. Trial registration: This study has been registered in the German Clinical Trial Registry with trial ID DRKS00018081.

Indexed as

complemantary and alternative therapiesdouble-blindhomeopathic medicationplaceborandomised controlled trialrhinitis

Identifiers

PMID42539590
PMCPMC13424193

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.