↓ Skip to main content

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

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Veterinary Research, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
15 tweeters
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
video
1 video uploader

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Veterinary homeopathy: Systematic review of medical conditions studied by randomised trials controlled by other than placebo
Published in
BMC Veterinary Research, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12917-015-0542-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robert T Mathie, Jürgen Clausen

Abstract

No systematic review has previously been carried out on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of veterinary homeopathy in which the control group was an intervention other than placebo (OTP). For eligible peer-reviewed RCTs, the objectives of this study were to assess the risk of bias (RoB) and to quantify the effect size of homeopathic intervention compared with an active comparator or with no treatment. Our systematic review approach complied fully with the PRISMA 2009 Checklist. Cochrane methods were applied to assess RoB and to derive effect size using standard meta-analysis methods. Based on a thorough and systematic literature search, the following key attributes of the published research were distinguished: individualised homeopathy (n = 1 RCT)/non-individualised homeopathy (n = 19); treatment (n = 14)/prophylaxis (n = 6); active controls (n = 18)/untreated controls (n = 2). The trials were highly diverse, representing 12 different medical conditions in 6 different species. No trial had sufficiently low RoB to be judged as reliable evidence: 16 of the 20 RCTs had high RoB; the remaining four had uncertain RoB in several domains of assessment. For three trials with uncertain RoB and without overt vested interest, it was inconclusive whether homeopathy combined with conventional intervention was more or was less effective than conventional intervention alone for modulation of immune response in calves, or in the prophylaxis of cattle tick or of diarrhoea in piglets. Due to the poor reliability of their data, OTP-controlled trials do not currently provide useful insight into the effectiveness of homeopathy in animals.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 2 3%
Unknown 57 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 20 34%
Researcher 9 15%
Student > Master 9 15%
Other 4 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 5 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 16 27%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 5%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 10 17%
Unknown 6 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 July 2020.
All research outputs
#1,030,722
of 16,005,061 outputs
Outputs from BMC Veterinary Research
#56
of 2,359 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#17,296
of 203,567 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Veterinary Research
#1
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,005,061 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,359 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 203,567 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.