Replications of fundamental research models in ultra high dilutions 1994 and 2015-update on a bibliometric study
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2015 |
Outros Autores: | , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
Texto Completo: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.homp.2015.10.003 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/158640 |
Resumo: | Introduction: This paper focuses exclusively on experimental models with ultra high dilutions (i.e. beyond 10(-23)) that have been submitted to replication scrutiny. It updates previous surveys, considers suggestions made by the research community and compares the state of replication in 1994 with that in 2015. Methods: Following literature research, biochemical, immunological, botanical, cell biological and zoological studies on ultra high dilutions (potencies) were included. Reports were grouped into initial studies, laboratory-internal, multicentre and external replications. Repetition could yield either comparable, or zero, or opposite results. The null-hypothesis was that test and control groups would not be distinguishable (zero effect). Results: A total of 126 studies were found. From these, 28 were initial studies. When all 98 replicative studies were considered, 70.4% (i.e. 69) reported a result comparable to that of the initial study, 20.4% (20) zero effect and 9.2% (9) an opposite result. Both for the studies until 1994 and the studies 1995-2015 the null-hypothesis (dominance of zero results) should be rejected. Furthermore, the odds of finding a comparable result are generally higher than of finding an opposite result. Although this is true for all three types of replication studies, the fraction of comparable studies diminishes from laboratory-internal (total 82.9%) to multicentre (total 75%) to external (total 48.3%), while the fraction of opposite results was 4.9%, 10.7% and 13.8%. Furthermore, it became obvious that the probability of an external replication producing comparable results is bigger for models that had already been further scrutinized by the initial researchers. Conclusions: We found 28 experimental models which underwent replication. In total, 24 models were replicated with comparable results, 12 models with zero effect, and 6 models with opposite results. Five models were externally reproduced with comparable results. We encourage further replications of studies in order to learn more about the model systems used. |
id |
UNSP_3085d492b356337c0be806f11e377e4e |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/158640 |
network_acronym_str |
UNSP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository_id_str |
2946 |
spelling |
Replications of fundamental research models in ultra high dilutions 1994 and 2015-update on a bibliometric studyReviewBasic researchHomeopathyUltra high dilutionReplicationIntroduction: This paper focuses exclusively on experimental models with ultra high dilutions (i.e. beyond 10(-23)) that have been submitted to replication scrutiny. It updates previous surveys, considers suggestions made by the research community and compares the state of replication in 1994 with that in 2015. Methods: Following literature research, biochemical, immunological, botanical, cell biological and zoological studies on ultra high dilutions (potencies) were included. Reports were grouped into initial studies, laboratory-internal, multicentre and external replications. Repetition could yield either comparable, or zero, or opposite results. The null-hypothesis was that test and control groups would not be distinguishable (zero effect). Results: A total of 126 studies were found. From these, 28 were initial studies. When all 98 replicative studies were considered, 70.4% (i.e. 69) reported a result comparable to that of the initial study, 20.4% (20) zero effect and 9.2% (9) an opposite result. Both for the studies until 1994 and the studies 1995-2015 the null-hypothesis (dominance of zero results) should be rejected. Furthermore, the odds of finding a comparable result are generally higher than of finding an opposite result. Although this is true for all three types of replication studies, the fraction of comparable studies diminishes from laboratory-internal (total 82.9%) to multicentre (total 75%) to external (total 48.3%), while the fraction of opposite results was 4.9%, 10.7% and 13.8%. Furthermore, it became obvious that the probability of an external replication producing comparable results is bigger for models that had already been further scrutinized by the initial researchers. Conclusions: We found 28 experimental models which underwent replication. In total, 24 models were replicated with comparable results, 12 models with zero effect, and 6 models with opposite results. Five models were externally reproduced with comparable results. We encourage further replications of studies in order to learn more about the model systems used.Interuniv Coll Hlth & Dev Graz Castle Seggau, A-8042 Graz, AustriaUniv Verona, I-37100 Verona, ItalyUniv Estadual Paulista, Sao Paulo, BrazilUniv Witten Herdecke, Witten, GermanyUniv Bern, Inst Complementary Med IKOM, CH-3012 Bern, SwitzerlandUniv Freiburg, Freiburg, GermanyUniv Estadual Paulista, Sao Paulo, BrazilElsevier B.V.Interuniv Coll Hlth & Dev Graz Castle SeggauUniv VeronaUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)Univ Witten HerdeckeUniv BernUniv FreiburgEndler, Peter ChristianBellavite, PaoloBonamin, Leoni [UNESP]Jaeger, TimMazon, Sintia2018-11-26T15:28:26Z2018-11-26T15:28:26Z2015-10-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/article234-245application/pdfhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.homp.2015.10.003Homeopathy. Oxford: Elsevier Sci Ltd, v. 104, n. 4, p. 234-245, 2015.1475-4916http://hdl.handle.net/11449/15864010.1016/j.homp.2015.10.003WOS:000367215300004WOS000367215300004.pdfWeb of Sciencereponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPengHomeopathy0,678info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2023-10-17T06:09:41Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/158640Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestopendoar:29462024-08-05T15:12:07.748772Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Replications of fundamental research models in ultra high dilutions 1994 and 2015-update on a bibliometric study |
title |
Replications of fundamental research models in ultra high dilutions 1994 and 2015-update on a bibliometric study |
spellingShingle |
Replications of fundamental research models in ultra high dilutions 1994 and 2015-update on a bibliometric study Endler, Peter Christian Review Basic research Homeopathy Ultra high dilution Replication |
title_short |
Replications of fundamental research models in ultra high dilutions 1994 and 2015-update on a bibliometric study |
title_full |
Replications of fundamental research models in ultra high dilutions 1994 and 2015-update on a bibliometric study |
title_fullStr |
Replications of fundamental research models in ultra high dilutions 1994 and 2015-update on a bibliometric study |
title_full_unstemmed |
Replications of fundamental research models in ultra high dilutions 1994 and 2015-update on a bibliometric study |
title_sort |
Replications of fundamental research models in ultra high dilutions 1994 and 2015-update on a bibliometric study |
author |
Endler, Peter Christian |
author_facet |
Endler, Peter Christian Bellavite, Paolo Bonamin, Leoni [UNESP] Jaeger, Tim Mazon, Sintia |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Bellavite, Paolo Bonamin, Leoni [UNESP] Jaeger, Tim Mazon, Sintia |
author2_role |
author author author author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Interuniv Coll Hlth & Dev Graz Castle Seggau Univ Verona Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) Univ Witten Herdecke Univ Bern Univ Freiburg |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Endler, Peter Christian Bellavite, Paolo Bonamin, Leoni [UNESP] Jaeger, Tim Mazon, Sintia |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Review Basic research Homeopathy Ultra high dilution Replication |
topic |
Review Basic research Homeopathy Ultra high dilution Replication |
description |
Introduction: This paper focuses exclusively on experimental models with ultra high dilutions (i.e. beyond 10(-23)) that have been submitted to replication scrutiny. It updates previous surveys, considers suggestions made by the research community and compares the state of replication in 1994 with that in 2015. Methods: Following literature research, biochemical, immunological, botanical, cell biological and zoological studies on ultra high dilutions (potencies) were included. Reports were grouped into initial studies, laboratory-internal, multicentre and external replications. Repetition could yield either comparable, or zero, or opposite results. The null-hypothesis was that test and control groups would not be distinguishable (zero effect). Results: A total of 126 studies were found. From these, 28 were initial studies. When all 98 replicative studies were considered, 70.4% (i.e. 69) reported a result comparable to that of the initial study, 20.4% (20) zero effect and 9.2% (9) an opposite result. Both for the studies until 1994 and the studies 1995-2015 the null-hypothesis (dominance of zero results) should be rejected. Furthermore, the odds of finding a comparable result are generally higher than of finding an opposite result. Although this is true for all three types of replication studies, the fraction of comparable studies diminishes from laboratory-internal (total 82.9%) to multicentre (total 75%) to external (total 48.3%), while the fraction of opposite results was 4.9%, 10.7% and 13.8%. Furthermore, it became obvious that the probability of an external replication producing comparable results is bigger for models that had already been further scrutinized by the initial researchers. Conclusions: We found 28 experimental models which underwent replication. In total, 24 models were replicated with comparable results, 12 models with zero effect, and 6 models with opposite results. Five models were externally reproduced with comparable results. We encourage further replications of studies in order to learn more about the model systems used. |
publishDate |
2015 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2015-10-01 2018-11-26T15:28:26Z 2018-11-26T15:28:26Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.homp.2015.10.003 Homeopathy. Oxford: Elsevier Sci Ltd, v. 104, n. 4, p. 234-245, 2015. 1475-4916 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/158640 10.1016/j.homp.2015.10.003 WOS:000367215300004 WOS000367215300004.pdf |
url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.homp.2015.10.003 http://hdl.handle.net/11449/158640 |
identifier_str_mv |
Homeopathy. Oxford: Elsevier Sci Ltd, v. 104, n. 4, p. 234-245, 2015. 1475-4916 10.1016/j.homp.2015.10.003 WOS:000367215300004 WOS000367215300004.pdf |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
Homeopathy 0,678 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
234-245 application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Elsevier B.V. |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Elsevier B.V. |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Web of Science reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) instacron:UNESP |
instname_str |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
instacron_str |
UNESP |
institution |
UNESP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1808128479023071232 |