Mathie Robert T, Hacke Daniela, Clausen Jürgen, Nicolai Ton, Riley David S, Fisher Peter
British Homeopathic Association, Hahnemann House, Luton, UK.
Homeopathy. 2013 Jan;102(1):3-24. doi: 10.1016/j.homp.2012.10.002.
A new programme of systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in homeopathy will distinguish important attributes of RCT records, including: placebo controlled versus other-than-placebo (OTP) controlled; individualised versus non-individualised homeopathy; peer-reviewed (PR) versus non peer-reviewed (NPR) sources.
(a) To outline the methods used to search and categorise the RCT literature; (b) to report details of the records retrieved; (c) to compare our retrieved records with those reported in two previous systematic reviews (Linde et al., 1997; Shang et al., 2005).
Ten major electronic databases were searched for records published up to the end of 2011. A record was accepted for subsequent systematic review if it was a substantive report of a clinical trial of homeopathic treatment or prophylaxis in humans, randomised and controlled, and published in a PR or NPR journal.
489 records were potentially eligible: 226 were rejected as non-journal, minor or repeat publications, or lacking randomisation and/or controls and/or a 'homeopathic' intervention; 263 (164 PR, 99 NPR) were acceptable for systematic review. The 263 accepted records comprised 217 (137 PR, 80 NPR) placebo-controlled RCTs, of which 121 were included by, 66 were published after, and 30 were potentially eligible for, but not listed by, Linde or Shang. The 137 PR records of placebo-controlled RCTs comprise 41 on individualised homeopathy and 96 on non-individualised homeopathy.
Our findings clarify the RCT literature in homeopathy. The 263 accepted journal papers will be the basis for our forthcoming programme of systematic reviews.
一项针对顺势疗法随机对照试验（RCT）的新系统评价计划将区分RCT记录的重要属性，包括：安慰剂对照与非安慰剂（OTP）对照；个体化顺势疗法与非个体化顺势疗法；同行评审（PR）与非同行评审（NPR）来源。
（a）概述用于检索和分类RCT文献的方法；（b）报告检索到的记录的详细信息；（c）将我们检索到的记录与之前两项系统评价（Linde等人，1997年；Shang等人，2005年）中报告的记录进行比较。
检索了十个主要电子数据库，以获取截至2011年底发表的记录。如果一份记录是关于人类顺势疗法治疗或预防的临床试验的实质性报告，且为随机对照试验，并发表在PR或NPR期刊上，则该记录将被接受用于后续的系统评价。
489份记录可能符合条件：226份因非期刊、次要或重复发表，或缺乏随机化和/或对照和/或“顺势疗法”干预而被拒绝；263份（164份PR，99份NPR）可接受用于系统评价。这263份被接受的记录包括217份（137份PR，80份NPR）安慰剂对照的RCT，其中121份被Linde或Shang纳入，66份在其之后发表，30份可能符合条件但未被Linde或Shang列出。137份安慰剂对照RCT的PR记录包括41份关于个体化顺势疗法的记录和96份关于非个体化顺势疗法的记录。
我们的研究结果澄清了顺势疗法的RCT文献。这263份被接受的期刊论文将作为我们即将开展的系统评价计划的基础。
