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

A L Rutten; C F Stolper; R F Lugten; R W Barthels

doi:10.1016/j.homp.2004.03.001

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

Homeopathy. 2004 Apr;93(2):78-83. doi: 10.1016/j.homp.2004.03.001.

Authors

A L Rutten¹, C F Stolper, R F Lugten, R W Barthels

Affiliation

¹ Commissie Methode en Validering VHAN (Dutch Association of Homeopathic Physicians), The Netherlands. lexrtn@concepts.nl

PMID: 15139091
DOI: 10.1016/j.homp.2004.03.001

Abstract

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. False positives (patients incorrectly classified as cured) weaken results of LR investigation. Weakening the standard to enlarge the research population will seriously bias the results. The same gold standard should be used in LR assessment of all symptoms.

Publication types

Review

MeSH terms

Bias*
False Negative Reactions
False Positive Reactions
Homeopathy* / standards
Humans
Likelihood Functions*
Materia Medica* / standards
Models, Theoretical
Reproducibility of Results
Research Design

Substances

Materia Medica