• Users Online:1621
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2020  |  Volume : 14  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 80-89

Proposed checklist for standardising homoeoprophylaxis interventions


Human Research and Ethics Committee, National Institute of Integrative Medicine, Melbourne, Australia

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Isaac Golden
PO Box 695, Gisborne, Victoria 3460
Australia
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ijrh.ijrh_18_20

Rights and Permissions

Background: Results from large homoeoprophylaxis (HP) interventions support the effectiveness of HP, but their variable methodology means that meaningful summaries of the combined data are difficult to produce. Objective: The aim of this article is to develop possible ways of standardising and improving the quality of data from HP interventions. Methods: Evidence collected from some large HP interventions is summarised. A previously suggested pre- and post-intervention checklist intended to help standardise the evidence from HP interventions is critically examined. Results: A summary of HP evidence from large interventions shows that there is a growing body of data suggesting a level of HP effectiveness between 85% and 90%. However, the type and quality of the evidence is variable. A previously developed checklist for researchers to use is modified and examples are given from actual interventions. Conclusion: There is a growing body of evidence supporting claims that HP interventions are effective. The evidence base needs to be improved in a range of ways. Requiring a standardised checklist to be completed by researchers before and after an intervention offers one method to improve the quality and consistency of evidence collected. HP has much to offer governments, health officials and citizens globally. It is safe, relatively effective, flexible, easily delivered and highly cost-effective. Yet, it is supported by very few governments. The quantity of evidence is growing, but the onus is on proponents to strengthen the quality of the evidence base supporting HP to the point where the inevitable critics of Homoeopathy are silenced.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1150    
    Printed57    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded456    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal