MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2529538294 · doi:10.1159/000450818

Characteristics of Homeopathy Users among Internal Medicine Patients in Germany

2016· article· en· W2529538294 on OpenAlexaff
Amie Steel, Holger Cramer, Brenda Leung, Romy Lauche, Jon Adams, Jost Langhorst, Gustav Dobos

Bibliographic record

VenueComplementary Medicine Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicComplementary and Alternative Medicine Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHomeopathyMedicineHelpfulnessFamily medicineAlternative medicineComplaintPhysical therapyPsychiatryPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Homeopathy use continues to grow in many European countries, and some studies have examined the characteristics of patients using homeopathy within the general population. The aim of this study was to identify predictors for homeopathy use among internal medicine patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis was conducted among all patients being referred to the Department of Internal and Integrative Medicine at Essen, Germany, over a 3-year period. The analysis examined whether patients had used homeopathy for their primary medical complaint before, the perceived benefit, and the perceived harm of homeopathy use. Odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using multiple logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Of 2,045 respondents, 715 (35.0%) reported having used homeopathy for their primary medical complaint (diagnosis according to the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems), with 359 (50.2%) reporting perceived benefits and 15 (2.1%) reporting harm. Homeopathy use was positively associated with female gender, high school level education, suffering from fibromyalgia or subthreshold depression, and being fast food abstinent, while patients with osteoarthritis, spinal or other pain, smokers, and patients with a high external-social health locus of control were less likely to use homeopathy. CONCLUSION: Personal characteristics and health status may impact on the use and the perceived helpfulness of homeopathy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.133
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.301 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComplementary Medicine ResearchSame topicComplementary and Alternative Medicine StudiesFrench-language works237,207