Table 3 Percent of studies with specific threats to validity of homeopathic and conventional interventions.
From: A systematic review of the quality of homeopathic clinical trials
Statistical Conclusion Validity | Homoeopathic | Conventional |
|---|---|---|
Low Statistical Power | 6.8 | 24.0 |
Violated Assumptions of Statistical Tests | 18.6 | 14.0 |
Fishing/Error Rate Problem | 6.8 | 24.0 |
Reliability of Measures | 100.0 | 94.0 |
Reliability of Treatment Implementation | 16.9 | 0.0 |
Random Irrelevancies in Experimental Setting | 8.5 | 0.0 |
Random Heterogeneity of Subjects | 57.6 | 52.0 |
Internal Validity | ||
History | 3.4 | 2.0 |
Maturation | 6.8 | 2.0 |
Testing | 1.7 | 0.0 |
Instrumentation | 0.0 | 0.0 |
Statistical Regression | 3.4 | 0.0 |
Selection | 100.0 | 70.0 |
Attrition | 76.3 | 0.0 |
Interaction with Selection | 20.3 | 2.0 |
Ambiguity of Direction of Causality | 0.0 | 2.0 |
Diffusion of Treatment | 1.7 | 0.0 |
Compensatory Equalization of Treatments | 0.0 | 0.0 |
Compensatory Rivalry | 0.0 | 0.0 |
Resentful Demoralization | 1.7 | 0.0 |
Construct Validity | ||
Inadequate Pre-operational Explication of Constructs | 22.0 | 4.0 |
Mono-Operation Bias | 37.3 | 92.0 |
Mono-Method Bias | 66.1 | 94.0 |
Evaluation Apprehension | 0.0 | 0.0 |
Experimenter Expectancies | 3.4 | 0.0 |
Confounding Constructs with Level of Constructs | 1.7 | 0.0 |
Interaction of Testing and Treatments | 0.0 | 0.0 |
Restricted Generalizability Across Constructs | 22.0 | 0.0 |
External Validity | ||
Sample Bias | 94.9 | 52.0 |
Interaction of Selection and Treatment | 1.7 | 0.0 |
Interaction of Setting and Treatment | 74.6 | 0.0 |
Interaction of History and Treatment | 0.0 | 0.0 |