An Open-Label Pilot Study of Homeopathic Treatment of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder in Children and Youth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An open-label pilot study of individualized homeopathy for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) was conducted to assess the potential for future studies with a focus on the feasibility of the recruitment plan and outcome measure schedules; identification of any group characteristics of participants who respond significantly to the therapy; and establishing the length of time required for an improvement in ADHD symptoms. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Participants (aged 6-16) were recruited through community advertisement and outreach. Participants completed 1 screening and 9 individualized homeopathic follow-up consultations. ADHD symptoms were assessed using the Conners 3 - Parent Questionnaire administered at each consultation. The pre- and post-study difference in Conners Global Index - Parent (CGI-P) T-score was evaluated for each participant. Baseline data of those who showed a statistically significant improvement (responders) were compared to those who did not (non-responders). RESULTS: 35 participants were enrolled over 11 months. 80% completed all 10 consultations in a median of 12.1 months. 63% had a statistically significant improvement in the primary outcome, first occurring after a mean of 4.5 visits. Overall scores for participants completing at least 2 data points decreased from a baseline median of 85.5 to 74.0 (p < 0.001, CI 95%). There were no significant baseline differences between responders and non-responders. No serious adverse events related to the therapy were reported. CONCLUSION: The change in the median CGI-P T-score from baseline to the end of this open-label pilot study was statistically significant. The research methods are feasible. Future studies are warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01141634.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".