[Mainstream medicine versus complementary medicine (homeopathic) intervention: a critical methodology study of care in pregnancy].

This meticulously evaluated study investigated two fundamental questions. The first dealt with the usefulness and adequacy of the instruments (questionnaires and case report forms) presently available in mainstream clinical research when trying to evaluate two dissimilar therapeutic systems such as main stream medicine and homeopathy. The second question dealt with the comparability of the two populations of patients in terms of individual personality characteristics as well as regarding the progress of the pregnancies and the course of the deliveries under the two systems of care and control. It turned out that a study of that kind is feasible in principle but is very demanding and time consuming. In addition the study showed clearly that the instruments presently available in mainstream medicine do not cover essential aspects of homeopathy and, therefore, impede a comparison of the two therapeutic systems. In the homeopathic group the frequency of situations requiring a Cesarean was remarkably low. However, the number of cases is too small to draw qualifying conclusions.