顺势疗法作用模式的理论与模型:范围综述。

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE
Christoph Dombrowsky, Sabine D Klein, Sandra Würtenberger, Stephan Baumgartner, Alexander L Tournier
{"title":"顺势疗法作用模式的理论与模型:范围综述。","authors":"Christoph Dombrowsky, Sabine D Klein, Sandra Würtenberger, Stephan Baumgartner, Alexander L Tournier","doi":"10.1089/jicm.2024.1007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Background:</i></b> There is currently no generally accepted theory able to explain the observed clinical efficacy of homeopathy. The aim of this scoping review is to identify all theoretical approaches that have been used to explain homeopathy, with the objective of establishing a basis for identifying promising hypotheses and theories for future elaboration. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Medline, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, PhilPapers, several online library catalogs, and personal libraries were searched for original studies up to July 12, 2024. Screening and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. Publications were included if they developed or advanced theories or models related to homeopathy. The aspect of homeopathy addressed by each study was extracted: the Principle of Similars and/or Potentisation. The theories identified in this review could be grouped into 14 overarching theoretical frameworks. <b><i>Results:</i></b> In total, 2118 records were screened, 500 full texts were assessed for eligibility, and 216 studies were included in this review. Starting in 1832 until the late 20th century, only sporadic contributions were found. From the 1990s, a marked increase in scholarly output was recorded. Most first authors were established in Germany, the United States, the United Kingdom, or India. The frameworks with the highest number of contributions were humanities, complex systems, water structures, and weak quantum theory. Overall, 22% of included publications described theoretical approaches that tried to cover both main aspects of homeopathy, 46% only Potentisation, 20% only the Principle of Similars (and 11% were unspecific). The theories within the humanities framework focused more on the Principle of Similars, complex systems theories on both principles, and the theories within the water structures, nanostructures, and mathematical models frameworks focused mostly on the Potentisation aspect. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> This scoping review offers an overview of theories and models on the mode of action of homeopathy. These could be classified into 14 largely nonoverlapping frameworks. Unexpectedly, the placebo did not emerge as such a framework. In the next step, these theories would be assessed in terms of their quality, plausibility, compatibility with modern science, and experimental falsifiability.</p>","PeriodicalId":29734,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Integrative and Complementary Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mapping the Theories and Models on the Mode of Action of Homeopathy: A Scoping Review.\",\"authors\":\"Christoph Dombrowsky, Sabine D Klein, Sandra Würtenberger, Stephan Baumgartner, Alexander L Tournier\",\"doi\":\"10.1089/jicm.2024.1007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b><i>Background:</i></b> There is currently no generally accepted theory able to explain the observed clinical efficacy of homeopathy. The aim of this scoping review is to identify all theoretical approaches that have been used to explain homeopathy, with the objective of establishing a basis for identifying promising hypotheses and theories for future elaboration. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> Medline, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, PhilPapers, several online library catalogs, and personal libraries were searched for original studies up to July 12, 2024. Screening and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. Publications were included if they developed or advanced theories or models related to homeopathy. The aspect of homeopathy addressed by each study was extracted: the Principle of Similars and/or Potentisation. The theories identified in this review could be grouped into 14 overarching theoretical frameworks. <b><i>Results:</i></b> In total, 2118 records were screened, 500 full texts were assessed for eligibility, and 216 studies were included in this review. Starting in 1832 until the late 20th century, only sporadic contributions were found. From the 1990s, a marked increase in scholarly output was recorded. Most first authors were established in Germany, the United States, the United Kingdom, or India. The frameworks with the highest number of contributions were humanities, complex systems, water structures, and weak quantum theory. Overall, 22% of included publications described theoretical approaches that tried to cover both main aspects of homeopathy, 46% only Potentisation, 20% only the Principle of Similars (and 11% were unspecific). The theories within the humanities framework focused more on the Principle of Similars, complex systems theories on both principles, and the theories within the water structures, nanostructures, and mathematical models frameworks focused mostly on the Potentisation aspect. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> This scoping review offers an overview of theories and models on the mode of action of homeopathy. These could be classified into 14 largely nonoverlapping frameworks. Unexpectedly, the placebo did not emerge as such a framework. In the next step, these theories would be assessed in terms of their quality, plausibility, compatibility with modern science, and experimental falsifiability.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":29734,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Integrative and Complementary Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Integrative and Complementary Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1089/jicm.2024.1007\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Integrative and Complementary Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/jicm.2024.1007","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:目前还没有公认的理论能够解释顺势疗法的临床疗效。本综述的目的是确定所有用于解释顺势疗法的理论方法,目的是为确定未来阐述的有希望的假设和理论奠定基础。方法:检索截至2024年7月12日的Medline、Embase、Scopus、Web of Science、PhilPapers、多个在线图书馆目录和个人图书馆的原始研究。筛选和数据提取由两名审稿人独立完成。如果出版物发展或改进了与顺势疗法相关的理论或模型,则纳入其中。每项研究所涉及的顺势疗法的方面被提取出来:相似和/或潜在原理。本综述中确定的理论可分为14个总体理论框架。结果:共有2118条记录被筛选,500篇全文被评估为合格,216项研究被纳入本综述。从1832年开始直到20世纪末,只有零星的贡献被发现。从20世纪90年代开始,学术产出显著增加。大多数第一作者都是在德国、美国、英国或印度创立的。贡献最多的框架是人文、复杂系统、水结构和弱量子理论。总的来说,22%的纳入的出版物描述了试图涵盖顺势疗法两个主要方面的理论方法,46%的出版物只有potentitisation, 20%的出版物只有相似原理(11%的出版物没有具体说明)。人文学科框架内的理论更多地侧重于相似原理、基于这两个原理的复杂系统理论,而水结构、纳米结构和数学模型框架内的理论主要侧重于潜能化方面。结论:本综述综述了顺势疗法作用模式的理论和模型。这些可以分为14个基本上互不重叠的框架。出乎意料的是,安慰剂并没有作为这样一个框架出现。下一步,这些理论将根据其质量、合理性、与现代科学的兼容性以及实验的可证伪性进行评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Mapping the Theories and Models on the Mode of Action of Homeopathy: A Scoping Review.

Background: There is currently no generally accepted theory able to explain the observed clinical efficacy of homeopathy. The aim of this scoping review is to identify all theoretical approaches that have been used to explain homeopathy, with the objective of establishing a basis for identifying promising hypotheses and theories for future elaboration. Methods: Medline, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, PhilPapers, several online library catalogs, and personal libraries were searched for original studies up to July 12, 2024. Screening and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. Publications were included if they developed or advanced theories or models related to homeopathy. The aspect of homeopathy addressed by each study was extracted: the Principle of Similars and/or Potentisation. The theories identified in this review could be grouped into 14 overarching theoretical frameworks. Results: In total, 2118 records were screened, 500 full texts were assessed for eligibility, and 216 studies were included in this review. Starting in 1832 until the late 20th century, only sporadic contributions were found. From the 1990s, a marked increase in scholarly output was recorded. Most first authors were established in Germany, the United States, the United Kingdom, or India. The frameworks with the highest number of contributions were humanities, complex systems, water structures, and weak quantum theory. Overall, 22% of included publications described theoretical approaches that tried to cover both main aspects of homeopathy, 46% only Potentisation, 20% only the Principle of Similars (and 11% were unspecific). The theories within the humanities framework focused more on the Principle of Similars, complex systems theories on both principles, and the theories within the water structures, nanostructures, and mathematical models frameworks focused mostly on the Potentisation aspect. Conclusions: This scoping review offers an overview of theories and models on the mode of action of homeopathy. These could be classified into 14 largely nonoverlapping frameworks. Unexpectedly, the placebo did not emerge as such a framework. In the next step, these theories would be assessed in terms of their quality, plausibility, compatibility with modern science, and experimental falsifiability.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信