Homeopathy for treatment of irritable bowel syndrome

Peckham, Emily; Cooper, Katy; Roberts, E. Rachel; Agrawal, Anurag K.; Brabyn, Sally; Tew, Garry A.

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd009710.pub3

Cited by 9 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…To identify published RCTs, we reviewed reference lists of four landmark systematic reviews by Mathie et al that assessed homeopathic treatments for any medical condition 12 13 29 30. and nine Cochrane reviews on homeopathy for specific indications 31–38. In addition, we conducted systematic literature searches from January 2013 to July 2021 to update the systematic reviews by Mathie et al 12 13.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…12 13 29 30 and nine Cochrane reviews on homeopathy for specific indications. [31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38] In addition, we conducted systematic literature searches from January 2013 to July 2021 to update the systematic reviews by Mathie et al 12 13 An experienced information specialist searched PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Cochrane Library/Wiley), Embase. com, Ovid AMED, CORE-Hom (https:// www.carstens-stiftung.de/datenbanken-zur-integrativen-medizin.…”

Section: Identification Of Published Trials and Corresponding Registr...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessing the magnitude of reporting bias in trials of homeopathy: a cross-sectional study and meta-analysis

Gartlehner

Emprechtinger

Hackl

et al. 2022

BMJ EBM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesTo assess the magnitude of reporting bias in trials assessing homeopathic treatments and its impact on evidence syntheses.DesignA cross-sectional study and meta-analysis. Two persons independently searched Clinicaltrials.gov, the EU Clinical Trials Register and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform up to April 2019 to identify registered homeopathy trials. To determine whether registered trials were published and to detect published but unregistered trials, two persons independently searched PubMed, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, Embase and Google Scholar up to April 2021. For meta-analyses, we used random effects models to determine the impact of unregistered studies on meta-analytic results.Main outcomes and measuresWe report the proportion of registered but unpublished trials and the proportion of published but unregistered trials. We also assessed whether primary outcomes were consistent between registration and publication. For meta-analyses, we used standardised mean differences (SMDs).ResultsSince 2002, almost 38% of registered homeopathy trials have remained unpublished, and 53% of published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have not been registered. Retrospective registration was more common than prospective registration. Furthermore, 25% of primary outcomes were altered or changed compared with the registry. Although we could detect a statistically significant trend toward an increase of registrations of homeopathy trials (p=0.001), almost 30% of RCTs published during the past 5 years had not been registered.A meta-analysis stratified by registration status of RCTs revealed substantially larger treatment effects of unregistered RCTs (SMD: −0.53, 95% CI −0.87 to −0.20) than registered RCTs (SMD: −0.14, 95% CI −0.35 to 0.07).ConclusionsRegistration of published trials was infrequent, many registered trials were not published and primary outcomes were often altered or changed. This likely affects the validity of the body of evidence of homeopathic literature and may overestimate the true treatment effect of homeopathic remedies.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Identification Of Published Trials and Corresponding Registr...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the magnitude of reporting bias in trials of homeopathy: a cross-sectional study and meta-analysis

Gartlehner

Emprechtinger

Hackl

et al. 2022

BMJ EBM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Otras revisiones hechas sobre la eficacia en general de los remedios homeopáticos [80], [91][92][93][94] o sus impactos en condiciones de salud específicas [88], [95][96][97][98][99][100][101][102][103][104][105][106][107] no han demostrado un efecto clínico benéfico de la práctica desarrollada por Samuel Hahnemann.…”

Section: Evidenciaunclassified

Medicina alternativa

Ramírez

2022

Spei Domus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

La homeopatía es una de las prácticas más utilizadas en la medicina alternativa, tanto en la atención de pacientes humanos como en veterinaria. Su origen se remonta a poco más de 200 años y su popularidad ha tenido altibajos desde entonces. Desde sus inicios y hasta la época moderna, los postulados de la homeopatía han sido motivo de debates en la medicina y en la ciencia. Conceptos aplicados en la homeopatía como el de similia similibus curentur, fuerza vital, dinamización, dosis mínimas o infinitesimales, y otras peculiaridades de la práctica, son poco reconocidos en la actualidad o incluso rechazados por completo. La debilidad del marco teórico de la homeopatía y la escasa evidencia seria que ha proporcionado dificulta su consideración como una herramienta de la medicina científica moderna. En la presente revisión de la literatura disponible, se describen de una forma crítica y rigurosa, los principios de la homeopatía, las evidencias experimentales de su funcionamiento, y su idoneidad en la medicina actual, para determinar si puede considerarse una práctica médica y veterinaria aceptable en el siglo XXI.

show abstract

“…Patients may also seek complementary or alternative medicines, such as herbs, acupuncture, and homeopathy, 34 , 35 to treat or supplement the treatment of their condition; however, their efficacy in treating symptoms remains inconclusive and controversial, 34 , 36 and these treatments are outside the scope of this review.…”

Section: Management Of Ibs-c and Cicmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1,26 Antispasmodics are sometimes used to treat abdominal cramping, but they should be used with caution as constipation is a common side effect (Table 2). 26 Patients may also seek complementary or alternative medicines, such as herbs, acupuncture, and homeopathy, 34,35 to treat or supplement the treatment of their condition; however, their efficacy in treating symptoms remains inconclusive and controversial, 34,36 and these treatments are outside the scope of this review.…”

Section: Non-approved Medicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of Treatment Options for Irritable Bowel Syndrome with Constipation and Chronic Idiopathic Constipation

Patel

Doerfler

Boutros

et al. 2021

IJGM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Irritable bowel syndrome with constipation (IBS-C) and chronic idiopathic constipation (CIC) are two common disorders of gut–brain interaction. Affected patients often first present to their primary care providers seeking care for symptoms of constipation, abdominal pain, and bloating, which have a significant impact on their health-related quality of life. These patients often require extensive counseling and reassurance, and knowledge of reliable diagnostic criteria and treatment options is imperative to managing their conditions. Family medicine practitioners, including nurse practitioners and physician assistants, are uniquely qualified to provide a diagnosis and safe, effective management of these disorders. This article reviews the latest evidence and provides practical advice related to diagnosis and management of IBS-C and CIC.

show abstract

Homeopathy for treatment of irritable bowel syndrome

Cited by 9 publications

References 40 publications

Assessing the magnitude of reporting bias in trials of homeopathy: a cross-sectional study and meta-analysis

Assessing the magnitude of reporting bias in trials of homeopathy: a cross-sectional study and meta-analysis

Medicina alternativa

Review of Treatment Options for Irritable Bowel Syndrome with Constipation and Chronic Idiopathic Constipation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About