Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorStub, Trine
dc.contributor.authorMusial, Frauke
dc.contributor.authorKristoffersen, Agnete Egilsdatter
dc.contributor.authorAlræk, Terje
dc.contributor.authorLiu, Jianping
dc.date.accessioned2017-03-30T13:34:04Z
dc.date.available2017-03-30T13:34:04Z
dc.date.issued2016-03-26
dc.description.abstractObjectives:<br>Homeopathy is a popular treatment modality among patient, however there is sparse research about adverse effects of homeopathy. A concept unique for homeopathy, is homeopathic aggravation that is understood as a transient worsening of the patients’ symptoms before an expected improvement occurs. From a risk perspective it is vital that a distinction between homeopathic aggravations and adverse effects is established. There is a lack of systematic information on how frequent adverse effects and homeopathic aggravations are reported in studies. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis were performed.<br>Design and setting:<br>Sixteen electronic databases were searched for Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs).The searches were limited from the year 1995 to January 2011. Forty-one RCTs, with a total of 6.055participants were included. A subtotal of 39 studies was included in the additional meta-analysis.Results: A total of 28 trials (68%) reported adverse effects and five trials (12%) reported homeopathic aggravations. The meta-analysis (including six subgroup comparisons) demonstrated that no significant difference was found between homeopathy and control with OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.86–1.14, I2= 54%. More than two third of the adverse effects were classified as grade 1 (68%) and two third were classified as grade2 (25%) and grade 3 (6%) according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Effects. Homeopathic aggravation was classified as grade 1 (98%) and grade 3 (2%), suggesting that homeopathic aggravations were reported to be less severe than adverse effects. The methodological quality according to a method recommended in the Cochrane handbook for RCTs, was high.<br>Conclusion:<br>Adverse effects including the concept of homeopathic aggravations are commonly reported in trials. The meta-analysis demonstrated that the proportion of patients experiencing adverse effects to be similar for patients randomized to homeopathic treatment compared to patients randomized to placebo and conventional medicineen_US
dc.descriptionManuscript. Published version available in <a href=http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ctim.2016.03.013>Complementary Therapies in Medicine 26 (2016) 146–163, doi 10.1016/j.ctim.2016.03.013</a>en_US
dc.identifier.citationStub T, Musial F, Kristoffersen AE, Alræk T, Liu J. Adverse effects of homeopathy, what do we know? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Complementary Therapies in Medicine. 2016;26:146-163en_US
dc.identifier.cristinIDFRIDAID 1377031
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.ctim.2016.03.013
dc.identifier.issn0965-2299
dc.identifier.issn1873-6963
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10037/10908
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.relation.journalComplementary Therapies in Medicine
dc.rights.accessRightsopenAccessen_US
dc.subjectVDP::Medisinske Fag: 700en_US
dc.subjectVDP::Medical disciplines: 700en_US
dc.titleAdverse effects of homeopathy, what do we know? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trialsen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.typeTidsskriftartikkelen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel