MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011573531 · doi:10.1055/s-0040-1702115

Homeopathy in the NHS (National Health Service): Diluted but Active

2020· article· en· W3011573531 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueHomeopathy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicComplementary and Alternative Medicine Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHomeopathyAlternative medicineMedicineService (business)Family medicineBusinessPathologyMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Despite being used satisfactorily by millions of people worldwide for a range of conditions, and the homeopathy community’s efforts to integrate homeopathy into NHS services, homeopathy provision has been declining.
\nAim: A pragmatic investigation of the integration of homeopathy in the UK NHS.
\nMethod: A nationwide postal survey among 144 members of the Faculty of Homeopathy mapped demographic data and integration of homeopathy services in the NHS, building on a Canadian integration model proposed by Boon in 2004. To enable a comprehensive understanding, 10 semi-structured interviews explored homeopaths' strategies to integrate homeopathy successfully into NHS services.
\nResults: A sample of 72 respondents revealed that 27 were actively offering homeopathy treatment in their NHS service. According to the continuum proposed by Boon, UK services integrating homeopathy treatment are characterised as collaborative and multidisciplinary. Seven profiles of homeopathic providers in the NHS could be distinguished. In the interviews, several suggestions were put forward to restore the badly damaged image of homeopathy. The interviewees disagreed about whether integration was the preferred strategy to reach this goal, or even whether integration was desirable at all, but the accreditation of homeopathy within the healthcare system was deemed vital for the survival of homeopathy, even for the success of private practices. A lack of resources and the dwindling numbers of newly trained homeopathy practitioners were mentioned as a matter of concern. A major frustration was the negation of existing evidence for homeopathy, leaving homeopaths questioning what kind of evidence – from fundamental research or from outcome studies – would be the best way forward.
\nConclusion: Despite positive results regarding the integration of homeopathic services in the NHS, the information disclosed in the interviews revealed a concern about the survival 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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.451
Threshold uncertainty score0.522

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.248 · 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