Journal Mobile Options
Table of Contents
Vol. 10, No. 2, 2003
Issue release date: April 2003
Add to my selection Citation Download
Forsch Komplementärmed Klass Naturheilkd 2003;10:88–94
(DOI:10.1159/000071668)
Review Article · Übersichtsarbeit

Characteristics and Quality of Systematic Reviews of Acupuncture, Herbal Medicines, and Homeopathy

Linde K.a, b · ter Riet G.c · Hondras M.d · Melchart D.a · Willich S.N.b
aCentre for Complementary Medicine Research, Department of Internal Medicine II, Technische Universität München; bInstitute for Social Medicine and Epidemiology, Charité Hospital, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany; cAcademic Medical Center, Amsterdam Center for Research on Health and Health Care, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; dConsortial Center for Chiropractic Research, Davenport, Iowa, USA Forsch Komplementärmed Klass Naturheilkd 2003;10:88–94 (DOI:10.1159/000071668)

Abstract

Background: We aimed to describe the approaches and characteristics of systematic reviews on three major complementary therapies and to assess their methodological quality. Methods: Systematic reviews of clinical trials of acupuncture, herbal medicines, and homeopathy were identified from a database developed for the Cochrane Collaboration Complementary Medicine Field. Information on conditions, interventions, methods, results, and conclusions was extracted using a pre-tested form; methodological quality was assessed using the Oxman scale. Results: 115 reviews were included (39 on acupuncture, 58 on herbal medicine, 18 on homeopathy). Research questions were most specific in herbal medicine, and tended to be very general in homeopathy. The main comparison in most reviews was with placebo. The methodological quality of reviews was highly variable. Deficiencies were most frequent for the description of the selection process and the summary of the results of primary studies. Conclusion: Systematic reviews tend to approach different complementary therapies in different manner. Compared to a set of reviews on analgesic interventions methodological quality was slightly better on the average, but there is ample room for improvement in future complementary medicine reviews.

 goto top of outline Publication Details

Forschende Komplementärmedizin und Klassische Naturheilkunde / Research in Complementary and Classical Natural Medicine
Offizielles Organ der Schweizerischen Medizinischen Gesellschaft für Phytotherapie, European Society for Classical Natural Medicine

Vol. 10, No. 2, Year 2003 (Cover Date: April 2003)

Journal Editor: M. Bühring, Berlin, Germany, K. Linde, München, Germany, W. Marktl, Wien, Austria, D. Melchart, München, Germany, K.M. Meyer-Abich, Essen, Germany, K.L. Resch, Bad Elster, Germany, R. Saller, Zürich, Switzerland, M. Ullmann, München, Germany, H. Walach, Freiburg i.Br., Germany
ISSN: 1424–7364 (print), 1424–7372 (Online)

For additional information: http://www.karger.com/journals/fkm


Copyright / Drug Dosage

Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher or, in the case of photocopying, direct payment of a specified fee to the Copyright Clearance Center.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in goverment regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.