Statistical analysis of six repertory rubrics after prospective assessment applying Bayes' theorem.

Background: After prospective assessment of six homeopathic symptoms we validated some rubrics of the homeopathic repertory using Bayesian theory. In this paper we introduce statistical arguments for introducing or discarding entries from the repertory.

Methods: 4094 patients entered the prospective study and 4072 prescriptions were evaluated.

New repertory, new considerations.

The criteria for entering medicines in repertory rubrics are unclear and partly incorrect. A new repertory should be based on clear and objective criteria. Retrospective and prospective assessment of medicines and symptoms by the Dutch Committee for Methods and Validation gives an indication of the validity of existing repertory entries.

A Bayesian perspective on the reliability of homeopathic repertories.

An interim assessment of likelihood ratio of homeopathic symptoms shows that there are serious flaws in Kent's repertory. The system of expressing relationship between symptoms and expected results from medicines by type-face is unclear and unreliable. Bayesian methods can improve this and expand the possibilities of the repertory including the possibility of interpreting the absence of expected symptoms.

Repertory and the symptom loquacity: some results from a pilot study on likelihood ratio.

Treatment outcome in a pilot study indicates that it is possible to assess likelihood ratios of homeopathic symptoms. Entries in repertory rubrics can be validated, but must still be handled carefully. Prospective research is the only acceptable way.

Repertory and likelihood ratio: time for structural changes.

If the likelihood ratio (LR) method is introduced, the repertory will gradually change as more symptoms are assessed. It will also change the use of the repertory: the most important medicines of each symptom rubric can be identified and relied on, even in large rubrics. This is also a good opportunity to correct structural shortcomings of the repertory, for instance, entries should be based on systematic analysis of materia medica instead of casual observations.

'Cure' as the gold standard for likelihood ratio assessment: theoretical considerations.

A gold standard is necessary to assess the validity of homeopathic symptoms. The gold standard is 'cure', but this is difficult to define, and depends on consensus. The likelihood ratio (LR) method will give valid results only if the gold standard is reliable.

Is assessment of likelihood ratio of homeopathic symptoms possible? A pilot study.

A pilot study was performed to investigate the possibilities and restrictions of likelihood ratio (LR) investigation using three symptoms. Qualitative vagueness and expectation bias is inherent in our method, but is, in part avoidable. It appears that experienced observers assess common homeopathic symptoms quite similarly.

Assessing likelihood ratio of clinical symptoms: handling vagueness.

Clinical symptoms including homeopathic symptoms are often vague. There is reluctance to assess clinical symptoms as diagnostic instruments because they are hard to define. Still, clinical symptoms appear effective in daily practice.

Improving homeopathic prescribing by applying epidemiological techniques: the role of likelihood ratio.

A committee of the Dutch Association of Homeopathic Physicians is trying to validate materia medica by evaluating successful cases. These cases are presented and assessed by a group of experienced homeopathic physicians to provide indications about the prevalence of symptoms related to particular homeopathic medicines. The next logical question is whether epidemiological techniques can be applied to them.