title: [Validity of clinical trials: are there differences between conventional and complementary alternative medicine?].
abstract: So far there has been no consensus on the criteria which confirm the validity of scientific contributions in conventional medicine (CM) and complementary/ alternative medicine (CAM). An interdisciplinary group of experts from various disciplines within each of the areas of medicine held six well-documented sessions in an effort to reach a consensus. The group agreed that the methods to confirm the validity of clinical trials are identical in CM and CAM. There are differences in research strategies and there may also be differences in interpreting the results, depending on the concept of medicine.
authors.affiliation: Klinische Okonomik, Universität Ulm. franz.porzsolt@uniklinikulm.de
authors.forename: F
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Porzsolt
authors.forename: K
authors.initials: K
authors.lastname: Linde
authors.forename: C
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Witt
authors.forename: I
authors.initials: I
authors.lastname: Mühlhauser
authors.forename: F
authors.initials: F
authors.lastname: Runkel
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Habs
mesh_terms: D002986:Clinical Trials as Topic / Q000592:standards*; D000529:Complementary Therapies / Q000379:methods* / Q000592:standards*; D005858:Germany; D017063:Outcome Assessment, Health Care / Q000379:methods* / Q000458:organization & administration*; D015203:Reproducibility of Results