Seit andertalb Jahren is more neutral.
Aktuelle Länderinfos für Auswanderer
Bis dahin liefert die Seite https: Die Kosten für Konsumgüter und Dienstleistungen können individuell sehr unterschiedlich ausfallen, je nach Lebensstandard und Konsumgewohnheiten. Die Angaben sind daher nur als allgemeine Anhaltspunkte zu verstehen. Als Basis dienen die amtlich publizierten Löhne und Konsumentenpreise der einzelnen Länder. Wechselkursschwankungen werden statistisch nivelliert. Departement für auswärtige Angelegenheiten lässt in jenen Städten Preise erheben, wo die Schweiz mit einer Botschaft oder einem Generalkonsulat vertreten ist.
Wohnkosten, Sozialabgaben und Steuern werden nicht erfasst. Möchten Sie Ihre Immobilie kostenlos bewerten und zum Höchstpreis verkaufen? Sollten die Infos dieser Seite wichtig für Sie sein, dann bookmarken Sie diese bitte und geben uns ein Like. Sind Sie der Meinung, dass auch andere diese Infos lesen sollten, dann empfehlen Sie diese Seite bitte weiter.
Wir würden uns sehr freuen, wenn Sie uns 5 Sterne geben. This has led some investigators to question whether homeopathic therapy could have any effect over placebo. However, proponents of homeopathy claim that the remedies act through biophysical pathways, and all include the idea of some form of information transfer from the diluted substance to the diluting agent" [ 11 ].
Of the systematic reviews published in CAM journals, only one mentions the issue of "scientific implausibility" and goes on to suggest that "homeopathy's possible mechanisms of action remain intangible theories, and it will be important ultimately to substantiate these" [ 12 ].
The other four review articles published in CAM journals begin with defensive statements, noting the benefits of homeopathy e. Despite these differences in approach, all of the systematic reviews are relatively evenhanded, noting arguments on either side of the debates surrounding efficacy and research methodology. Some scholars have speculated about a possible trend toward publishing negative results in conventional journals.
For example, Cucherat, et al. The results of this study provide some preliminary evidence to support this claim. That said, publication bias — that is, a journal favoring the publication of positive or negative results — is only one possible explanation of this apparent trend. There may also be a submission bias. For instance, are studies with a negative result submitted to conventional journals and those with a positive to CAM journals? Without access to submission patterns, it will be difficult to analyze this issue.
However, it is worth noting that an examination of the affiliations of the first authors of the clinical trials revealed that there was no clear pattern regarding where medical doctors and homeopathic experts publish. In other words, the apparent discipline and this was not always clear and home institution of the first author was not a predictor of where an article is published.
Our analysis of the systematic reviews also has some interesting implications. Though there is some evidence of a possible bias in the publication of clinical trials toward the negative in the conventional journals and toward the positive in the CAM journals , there does not appear to be a similar trend with reviews. In addition, these articles seemed relatively balanced in the presentation of results.
Given that there is often significant opportunity to editorialize in systematic reviews, this conclusion demonstrates that the authors and the editors of journals are striving to explore this controversial area in a relatively impartial manner.
This conclusion does not necessarily conflict with our data that suggests a publication bias. A publication bias would likely be an inadvertent systemic problem i.
This small study has a number of clear limitations. For example, we only considered articles that were published in English and we did not critique the quality of the study might higher quality studies be published in more well known conventional journals?
In addition, aside from the data on whether the conclusions were positive or negative, much of the analysis was subjective. Nevertheless, is does provide some preliminary evidence of a possible publication bias and insight on the general tone of publications involving homeopathy. Both Caulfield and Debow contributed to the design of the study, the analysis of the data and the writing and editing of the manuscript.
National Center for Biotechnology Information , U. Published online Jun Timothy Caulfield 1 and Suzanne DeBow 1. Author information Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer. Received Mar 15; Accepted Jun This article has been corrected. This article has been cited by other articles in PMC. Abstract Background Growing popularity of complementary and alternative medicine CAM in the public sector is reflected in the scientific community by an increased number of research articles assessing its therapeutic effects.
Results Forty-six peer-reviewed articles published in a total of 23 different journals were compared 26 in CAM journals and 20 in conventional journals. Conclusion A considerable difference exists between the number of clinical trials showing positive results published in CAM journals compared with traditional journals.
Background Growing popularity of complementary and alternative medicine CAM in the public sector is reflected in the scientific community by an increased number of research articles assessing efficacy and therapeutic effects. Methods Relevant homeopathic papers reporting on clinical trials were collected.
Results Clinical trials We examined 46 peer-reviewed articles published in a total of 23 different journals. Discussion Some scholars have speculated about a possible trend toward publishing negative results in conventional journals. Conclusion This small study has a number of clear limitations.
Competing interests The author s declare that they have no competing interests. Authors' contributions Both Caulfield and Debow contributed to the design of the study, the analysis of the data and the writing and editing of the manuscript.
Pre-publication history The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here: A randomized controlled study of reviewer bias against an unconventional therapy. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. Media Representations of Homeopathy as "Junk Science". Journal of American and Comparative Cultures. Clinical Trials of Homeopathy. A systematic review of systematic reviews of homeopathy. Br J Clin Pharmacol.
Contesting the rule s of medicine: Cucherat M, et al. Evidence of clinical efficacy of homeopathy. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. A double-blind, controlled clinical trial of homeopathy and an analysis of lunar phases and postoperative outcome.
Homeopathic arnica for prevention of pain and bruising: J R Soc Med. Efficacy of Homeopathy Arnica: A systematic review of placebo-controlled clinical trials.