Exploring the predictive value of specific symptom as prognostic factor: Assessment of group-confined likelihood ratio for symptom ‘Headache’ in 20 lesser-known drugs
Jaya Gupta1, Suhana P Azis1, Lex Rutten2, Raj K Manchanda1, Abhishek Pramanik1, Partha Sarathi Chakraborty3, Pramodji Singh4, JP Singh5, Mahesh Sah5, G R. C. Reddy6, Manas Sarangi7, Abhijit Chakma7, Sunil Ramteke8, PK Pradhan9, P Devi10, Ojit Singh11, AR Sahoo12, KK Avinash13, Navin Kumar Singh14, Siva Prasad Goli15
1 Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy, HQ, New Delhi, India 2 Independent Researcher, Netherlands 3 Dr. Anjali Chatterjee Regional Research Institute for Homoeopathy, Kolkata, West Bengal, India 4 Dr. DP Rastogi Central Research Institute for Homoeopathy, Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India 5 Homoeopathy Drug Research Institute, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India 6 Regional Research Institute for Homoeopathy, Gudivada, Andhra Pradesh, India 7 Regional Research Institute for Homoeopathy, Agartala, Tripura, India 8 Regional Research Institute for Homoeopathy, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, India 9 Regional Research Institute for Homoeopathy, Puri, Odisha, India 10 Regional Research Institute for Homoeopathy, Guwahati, Assam, India 11 Regional Research Institute for Homoeopathy, Imphal, Manipur, India 12 Drug Proving Unit, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India 13 Clinical Verification Unit, Patna, Bihar, India 14 Clinical Research Unit, Port Blair, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, India 15 Clinical Research Unit, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
Correspondence Address:
Dr. Jaya Gupta 61-65, Institutional Area, Janak Puri, New Delhi - 110 058 India
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/ijrh.ijrh_65_18
|
Aim: Assessment of group-confined likelihood ratio (GCLR) for the symptom ‘Headache’ from among 20 lesser-known remedies clinically verified by the Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy during the period 2012–2018. Materials and Methods: Analysis of data of the clinical verification study, which was a multicentric, open-label, observational clinical study conducted at 13 study sites of the council. The 50 medicines that completed the drug proving programme of the council were clinically verified in ascending potencies of 6C, 30C and 200C. Of these, 20 lesser-known medicines allowed analysis of the prevalence and LR of the symptom ‘Headache'. These 20 medicines were ordered according to the prevalence of headache, and LR >1 gave an indication what medicines were more related to headache than others. Results: The symptom ‘Headache’ was recorded in a part of the population: 4582 patients where 20 lesser-known medicines were prescribed. Of these medicines, 8 have a GCLR >1, indicating that the symptom headache could indicate these medicines out of the assessed group of 20. Only 5 had statistically significant confidence interval: Allium sativum, Formicum acidum, Gymnema sylvestre, Avena sativa and Persea americana. Among these, two medicines, Allium sativum and Formicum acidum, have significantly higher GCLR. Conclusion: Of 20 lesser-known homeopathic medicines, two could be considered for the further evaluation of the relationship with headache. These findings should be confirmed in properly organised prognostic factor research in a larger population, not restricted to specific medicines, that enables proper comparison.
|