順勢療法討論區 Homeopathy Discuss!

 找回密碼
 註冊 register
搜索
查看: 1297|回復: 0

Speaker ~ Dr Robert Mathie

[複製鏈接]
admin 發表於 2015-6-7 17:23:58 | 顯示全部樓層 |閱讀模式
DAY 3 – 7 June 2015 (11:00-12:20) speaker7.jpg
https://goo.gl/ub1H5S

Dr Robert Mathie,
UK.Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised, placebo-controlled, trialsof individualised homeopathic treatment
來自英國。個人化順勢療法治療的隨機、安慰劑對照臨床試驗的系統評價和薈萃分析
  
Background
  
背景
  
Research Development Adviser, British Homeopathic  Association (BHA), Luton, UK
  
英國盧頓鎮,英國順勢療法協會(British Homeopathic Association, BHA)研究發展顧問
  
  
During 25 years in the university sector, Dr Mathie  published over 100 peer-reviewed papers. Since 2010, Robert has focused on  reviewing and clarifying the research literature by means of a major  programme of systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials in human and  veterinary homeopathy.
  
Dr. Mathie於大學期間的25年來,共發表了多於100篇同業評審論文。自2010年以來,Dr. Mathie一直專注以系統評價的主要程序來審查及闡明順勢療法用於人類及動物上、隨機對照試驗的研究文獻。
  
Research Area
  
研究範圍
Robert T. Mathie, Michel Van Wassenhoven, Jennifer  Jacobs, Menachem Oberbaum, Helmut Roniger, Joyce Frye, Raj K. Manchanda,  Laurence Terzan, and others. Model validity of randomised placebo-controlled  trials of individualised homeopathic treatment. Homeopathy March 14, 2015
  
個人化順勢療法治療於隨機、安慰劑對照臨床試驗的有效性模式
  
順勢療法》(Homeopathy) 2015年3月14
  
  
  
Background
  
背景:
  
Though potentially an important limitation in the  literature of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of homeopathy, the model  validity of homeopathic treatment (MVHT) has not previously been  systematically investigated.
  
雖然在順勢療法隨機對照試驗(RCT)的文獻中潛在著一個重要的限制,順勢療法治療的有效性模式(MVHT)還未有系統化的研究。
  
  
Objective
  
目的:
  
As an integral part of a programme of systematic  reviews, to assess MVHT of eligible RCTs of individualised homeopathic  treatment.
  
作為系統性評估方案的一個組成部分,評估個人化順勢療法治療的隨機對照臨床試驗質素的MVHT。
  
  
Methods
  
方法:
  
From 46 previously identified papers in the  category, 31 papers (reporting a total of 32 RCTs) were eligible for  systematic review and were thus the subject of the study. For each of six  domains of assessment per trial, MVHT was judged independently by three  randomly allocated assessors from our group, who reached a final verdict by  consensus discussion as necessary.
  
從類別裏的46篇先前發現的論文中, 31篇論文(共有32個隨機對照試驗)符合系統評估的質素,研究的課題因而成立。每一份隨機對照試驗都會分別於六個領域中受評估,所有MVHT的評審都是獨立的,都是由我們的成員中隨機分配三位評估人員,有需要的話會以共識討論達成最终判決。
  
  
Results
  
結果:
  
  
Nineteen trials were judged overall as ‘acceptable’ MVHT,  nine as ‘uncertain’ MVHT, and four as ‘inadequate’ MVHT.
  
19項試驗被整體判斷為「可接受」的MVHT,九項被判斷為「不確定」的  MVHT,四項被判斷為「不足」的MVHT。
  
  
Conclusions
  
總結:
  
These results do not support concern that deficient  MVHT has frequently undermined the published findings of RCTs of individualised  homeopathy. However, the 13 trials with ‘uncertain’ or ‘inadequate’ MVHT will  be a focus of attention in supplementary meta-analysis. New RCTs of  individualised homeopathy must aim to maximise MVHT and to enable its  assessment through clear reporting.
  
有關注主張「缺乏MVHT經常會削弱個人化順勢療法隨機對照試驗公佈的調查結果」,是次研究結果不支持此說法。然而,13個被判斷為 MVHT「不確定」或「不足」的試驗,將成為補充薈萃分析所關注的焦點。新的個人化的順勢療法隨機對照試驗必須以提升MVHT至最大限度為目標,讓其可以透過明確報告被評估。




您需要登錄後才可以回帖 登錄 | 註冊 register

本版積分規則

小黑屋|手機版|Archiver|順勢療法討論區 Homeopathy Discuss!  

GMT+8, 2019-7-23 11:20 , Processed in 0.080996 second(s), 23 queries .

Powered by Discuz! X3.1

© 2001-2013 Comsenz Inc.

快速回復 返回頂部 返回列表