Skip to main content

Table 4 Summary statistics for: (a) trials at uncertain risk of bias; (b) trials at high risk of bias

From: Veterinary homeopathy: Systematic review of medical conditions studied by randomised trials controlled by other than placebo

a) UNCERTAIN RISK OF BIAS
iii: Non-individualised/Prophylaxis
Ref. First author Year Condition Species Outcome measure Hom. Cont. Summary effect measure Effect size (95 % CI) Direction of change favouring homeopathy Direction of effect P value Inference
*
A34 Signoretti 2008 Ectoparasite infestation Cattle Faecal egg count per gram 340 (sd, 214); N = 8 207 (sd, 131); N = 8 SMD 0.71 [−0.31, 1.73] Lower Cont. 0.17 [iii: b]
A36 Soto 2008 Diarrhoea (neonatal) Pigs Number of animal-days with diarrhoea 34/192 25/192 OR 0.70 [0.40, 1.22] Lower Cont. 0.20 [iii: b]
A31 Reis 2006 Handling stress Cattle Serum cortisol 5.1 (sd, 1.8); N = 30 5.3 (sd, 1.45); N = 30 SMD −0.12 [−0.63, 0.39] Lower Hom. 0.64 [iii: b]
A32 Reis 2008 Immune response to rabies vaccination Cattle Rabies-neutralizing antibody titer 10.8 (sd, 9.5); N = 15 14.4 (sd, 11.1); N = 15 SMD −0.34 [−1.06, 0.38] Higher Cont. 0.36 [iii: b]
b) HIGH RISK OF BIAS
i: Individualised/Treatment
Ref. First author Year Condition Species Outcome measure Hom. Cont. Summary effect measure Effect size (95 % CI) Direction of change favouring homeopathy Direction of effect P value Inference
a
A12 Schütte 1988 Mastitis, metritis and agalactia Pigs None useable X X X X X X X X
ii: Non-individualised/Treatment
Ref. First author Year Condition Species Outcome measure Hom. Cont. Summary effect measure Effect size (95 % CI) Direction of change favouring homeopathy Direction of effect P value Inference
*
A42 Lohr 2013 Diarrhoea (neonatal) Cattle Cure rate (Sum-score [physical condition]) 37/50 42/56 OR 0.95 [0.40, 2.28] Higher Cont. 0.91 [iii: a]
A14 Coelho 2009 Diarrhoea (neonatal) Pigs Proportion of animals without diarrhoea at the end of treatment 35/35 5/9 OR 58.09 [2.73, 1234.82] Higher Hom. 0.009 [i: a]
A41 Catto 2013 Ectoparasite infestation Cattle None useable X X X X X X X X
A19 Silva 2008 Ectoparasite infestation Cattle None useable X X X X X X X X
A40 Lotfollahzadeh 2012 Foot-and-mouth disease Cattle Rectal temperature 38.6 (sd, 0.2); N = 50 39.0 (sd, 0.1); N = 15 SMD −2.16 [−2.86, −1.47] Lower Hom. <0.001 [i: a]
A21 Zacharias 2008 Gastrointestinal nematodes Sheep Faecal egg count 954 (sd, 1077); N = 7 1308 (sd, 1108); N = 7 SMD −0.30 [−1.36, 0.75] Lower Hom. 0.57 [iii: a]
A15 Faulstich 2006 Lameness Horses Treatment success (overall effectiveness) 18/22 14/19 OR 1.61 [0.36, 7.12] Higher Hom. 0.53 [iii: a]
A16 Klocke 2010 Mastitis Cattle Absence of clinical mastitis infection 29/32 32/36 OR 1.21 [0.25, 5.86] Higher Hom. 0.81 [iii: a]
A20 Varshney 2005 Mastitis Cattle Quarter cure-rate (non-fibrosed) 58/67 57/96 OR 4.41 [1.96, 9.93] Higher Hom. <0.001 [i: a]
A39 Braun 2011 Mastitis, metritis and agalactia Pigs Cure rate (MMA-sum score) 20/28 21/32 OR 1.31 [0.44, 3.92] Higher Hom. 0.63 [iii: a]
A13 Beceriklisoy 2008 Pseudopregnancy Dogs Treatment 'success' (recovery rate) 30/30 3/8 OR 95.86 [4.32, 2126.07] Higher Hom. 0.004 [i: a]
A18 Sandoval 1998 Salmonellosis Birds None useable X X X X X X X X
A17 Rocha 2006 Gastrointestinal nematodes Sheep Proportion of animals not requiring anti-helminthic treatment 7/10 5/10 OR 2.33 [0.37, 14.61] Higher Hom. 0.37 [iii: b]
iii: Non-individualised/Prophylaxis
Ref. First author Year Condition Species Outcome measure Hom. Cont. Summary effect measure Effect size (95 % CI) Direction of change favouring homeopathy Direction of effect P value Inference
a
A35 Sommer 1972 Infertility Cattle Number with infertility disorders 13/40 9/18 OR 2.08 [0.67, 6.47] Lower Hom. 0.21 [iii: c]
A38 Williamson 1991 Infertility Cattle None useable X X X X X X X X
  1. Hom. = homeopathy. Cont. = control. CI = confidence interval. sd = standard deviation. SMD = standardised mean difference. OR = odds ratio
  2. Italic text indicates trials with a potential risk of bias due to funding source (see also Table 1)
  3. aInference from the statistical findings is given by reference to the numbered study designs in Methods: Direction of effect of treatment/prophylaxis per trial