Case Reporting in Homeopathy—An Overview of Guidelines and Scientific Tools

Michael Teut; Robbert A. van Haselen; Lex Rutten; Chetna Deep Lamba; Gerhard Bleul; Susanne Ulbrich-Zürni

doi:10.1055/s-0041-1731313

Homeopathy, Inhaltsverzeichnis

CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Homeopathy 2022; 111(01): 002-009
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1731313

Review Article

Case Reporting in Homeopathy—An Overview of Guidelines and Scientific Tools

Michael Teut

¹Institute for Social Medicine, Epidemiology and Health Economics, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt Universität zu Berlin, Luisenstr. 57, Berlin, Germany

,

Robbert A. van Haselen

²International Institute for Integrated Medicine, Kingston, UK

,

Lex Rutten

³Independent Researcher, Breda, Netherlands

,

Chetna Deep Lamba

⁴Central Council for Research in Homoeopathy, Janak Puri, New Delhi, India

,

Gerhard Bleul^†

⁵Family Physician, Hünstetten, Kesselbach, Germany

,

Susanne Ulbrich-Zürni

⁶Institute of Integrative Medicine, Universität Witten-Herdecke, Herdecke, Germany

› Institutsangaben

Abstract

Case reports have been of central importance to the development of homeopathy over the past 200 years. With a special focus on homeopathy, we give an overview on guidelines and tools that may help to improve the quality of case reports. Reporting guidelines such as CARE (Case Report), HOM-CASE (Homeopathic Clinical Case Reports), and the WissHom Documentation Standard help to improve the quality of reporting and strengthen the scientific value of a case report. Additional scientific tools such as prospective outcome assessment, prognostic factor research, cognition-based medicine, and the Modified Naranjo Criteria for Homeopathy (MONARCH) score may be helpful in improving case documentation and evaluation.

Keywords

homeopathy - case reporting - guidelines - case research

Volltext

Referenzen

References
1 Feinstein AR. Clinical Judgment. Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins; 1967
2 Kienle GS. Why medical case reports?. Glob Adv Health Med 2012; 1: 8-9
3 van Haselen R. Harvesting the benefits of clinical case reports: how to separate the chaff from the wheat?. Complement Ther Med 2015; 23: 139-140
4 Gagnier JJ, Kienle G, Altman DG. et al. The CARE guidelines: consensus-based clinical case reporting guideline development. Glob Adv Health Med 2013; 2: 38-43
5 Gagnier JJ, Kienle G, Altman DG. et al. The CARE guidelines: consensus-based clinical case report guideline development. J Clin Epidemiol 2014; 67: 46-51
6 van Haselen RA. Homeopathic clinical case reports: development of a supplement (HOM-CASE) to the CARE clinical case reporting guideline. Complement Ther Med 2016; 25: 78-85
7 Bleul G. Grundsätze und Elemente der Falldokumentation—Konsensus aus Drei Konferenzen des DZVhÄ und InHom. Kongressdokumentation ICE 8. Köthen: InHom; 2009
8 Bleul G. Placeboeffekt oder arzneiwirkung—was zeigt die falldokumentation?. Allg Homoopath Ztg 2015; 260: 21-25
9 Bleul G. Grundsätze der falldokumentation in der homöopathie. Allg Homoopath Ztg 2020; 265: 10-14
10 Witt CM, Lüdtke R, Baur R, Willich SN. Homeopathic medical practice: long-term results of a cohort study with 3981 patients. BMC Public Health 2005; 5: 115
11 Paterson C. Measuring outcomes in primary care: a patient generated measure, MYMOP, compared with the SF-36 health survey. BMJ 1996; 312: 1016-1020
12 Polus BI, Kimpton AJ, Walsh MJ. Use of the measure your medical outcome profile (MYMOP2) and W-BQ12 (Well-Being) outcomes measures to evaluate chiropractic treatment: an observational study. Chiropr Man Therap 2011; 19: 7
13 Thompson E, Viksveen P, Barron S. A patient reported outcome measure in homeopathic clinical practice for long-term conditions. Homeopathy 2016; 105: 309-317
14 Reilly D, Mercer SW, Bikker AP, Harrison T. Outcome related to impact on daily living: preliminary validation of the ORIDL instrument. BMC Health Serv Res 2007; 7: 139
15 Thompson EA, Mathie RT, Baitson ES. et al. Towards standard setting for patient-reported outcomes in the NHS homeopathic hospitals. Homeopathy 2008; 97: 114-121
16 Smith DL. Goal attainment scaling as an adjunct to counseling. J Couns Psychol 1976; 23: 22-27
17 Rutten L, Smedley T, Ives G. et al. Data collection during the COVID-19 pandemic: learning from experience, resulting in a Bayesian repertory. Homeopathy 2021; 110: 94-101
18 Hingorani AD, van der Windt DA, Riley RD. et al. Prognosis research strategy (PROGRESS) 4: stratified medicine research. BMJ 2013; 346: e5793
19 Hemingway H, Croft P, Perel P. et al. Prognosis research strategy (PROGRESS) 1: a framework for researching clinical outcomes. BMJ 2013; 346: e5595
20 van Haselen R. Development of a prognostic factor prediction model in patients with musculoskeletal pain treated with homeopathy: an individual patient data meta-analysis of three randomized clinical trials. Complement Med Res 2021; 28: 46-55
21 Rutten AL, Stolper CF, Lugten RF, Barthels RW. Statistical analysis of six repertory rubrics after prospective assessment applying Bayes' theorem. Homeopathy 2009; 98: 26-34
22 Rutten L. Prognostic Factor Research in Homeopathy. New Delhi: Central Council for Research in Homeopathy; 2019
23 Rutten L, Muraleedharan K, Shinde V, Manchanda R. What is a homoeopathic symptom, in daily practice and research?. Indian J Res Homoeopathy 2017; 11: 12-20
24 Croskerry P, Norman G. Overconfidence in clinical decision making. Am J Med 2008; 121: S24-S29
25 Souter K. Heuristics and bias in homeopathy. Homeopathy 2006; 95: 237-244
26 Naranjo CA, Busto U, Sellers EM. et al. A method for estimating the probability of adverse drug reactions. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1981; 30: 239-245
27 Lamba CD, Gupta VK, van Haselen R. et al. Evaluation of the modified Naranjo criteria for assessing causal attribution of clinical outcome to homeopathic intervention as presented in case reports. Homeopathy 2020; 109: 191-197
28 Kiene H. Komplementäre Methodenlehre der Klinischen Forschung. Cognition-Based Medicine. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2001
29 Kienle GS, Hamre HJ, Portalupi E, Kiene H. Improving the quality of therapeutic reports of single cases and case series in oncology—criteria and checklist. Altern Ther Health Med 2004; 10: 68-72
30 Duncker K. Zur Psychologie des Produktiven Denkens. Berlin: Springer; 1935
31 Kiene H, Hamre HJ, Kienle GS. In support of clinical case reports: a system of causality assessment. Glob Adv Health Med 2013; 2: 64-75
32 Teut M. Scientific case studies in homoeopathy. Paper presented at: New Directions in Homeopathy Research—Advice from an Interdisciplinary Conference. Essen: KVC Verlag; 2009
33 Guyatt G, Sackett D, Adachi J. et al. A clinician's guide for conducting randomized trials in individual patients. CMAJ 1988; 139: 497-503
34 Baker DS. A Research Model for the Scientific Investigation of Homoeopathy [dissertation]. Limsore, Australia: Australian Centre for Complementary Medicine Education and Research, University of Queensland and Southern Cross University; 2006
35 Teut M, Linde K. Scientific case research in complementary and alternative medicine—a review. Complement Ther Med 2013; 21: 388-395
36 Kravitz RL, Duan N. Design and Implementation of N-of-1 Trials: A User's Guide. AHRQ Publication No. 13(14)-EHC122-EF. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2014
37 Ulbrich-Zürni S, Teut M, Roll S, Mathie RT. The N-of-1 clinical trial: a timely research opportunity in homeopathy. Homeopathy 2018; 107: 10-18