Are the Clinical Effects of Homoeopathy Placebo Effects?, Aijing Shang and colleagues' 2005 meta-analysis in The Lancet, compares 110 homeopathy trials against 110 matched conventional medicine trials and concludes homeopathy's effects are consistent with placebo once trial quality and size are accounted for. Its strength is that it is peer reviewed research in one of the most rigorously reviewed general medical journals, using a matched comparison design. Its limit is that its headline eight trial high quality subset has been disputed by homeopathy researchers on methodological grounds, a live disagreement a reader should check both sides of.
Facts
Assessment
Reliability Tier1
Reliability tier 1: a peer reviewed meta-analysis in one of the most rigorously reviewed general medical journals, using a matched comparison design. NotesMeta-analysis of 110 homeopathy trials against 110 matched conventional-medicine trials, concluding homeopathy's effects are consistent with placebo once trial quality and size are accounted for; the headline eight-trial subset has been disputed by homeopathy researchers.
Citation
AuthorAijing Shang et al.
PublisherThe Lancet
Publication Year2005
Source Typepeer-reviewed article
Claims Backed By This Source (9 claims)
This source backs 9 claims across the atlas. As facts: 7 well-attested, 1 popular myth - corrected. Plus 1 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.
Disposition By Topic
- Sources, 7 claims: 7 well-attested.
- Disciplines, 2 claims: 1 popular myth - corrected, 1 general references.
Popular myth - corrected
1Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.
View At A Past Year
The atlas records no dated fact of its own for this entry, so there is no other year to choose.