↓ Skip to main content

Real versus sham proximal biofield therapy in the treatment of warts of the hands and feet in adults: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial (MAGNETIK study)

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Real versus sham proximal biofield therapy in the treatment of warts of the hands and feet in adults: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial (MAGNETIK study)
Published in
Trials, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13063-017-1994-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cathy Gaillard, Laure Allain, Hélène Legros, Sylvie Brucato, Yohann Desgue, Christophe Rouillon, Laure Peyro-Saint-Paul, Anne Dompmartin

Abstract

Despite the lack of scientific studies on biofield therapies, they are widely acclaimed by patients. The mechanisms of action are not explained by current allopathic medical approaches. Warts are common and contagious viral lesions that may be refractory to standard dermatologic treatments such as cryotherapy, laser therapy, and keratolytic ointments. Biofield therapies are efficient in various pathologies. Their ability to treat warts has never been demonstrated in a scientific study with a robust methodology. Patients with refractory warts often place their trust in these alternative therapies because of the poor results obtained from traditional medicine. We propose a prospective, randomized, single-blind, assessor-blind trial to evaluate the efficacy of treatment of warts by biofield therapy. Subjects with warts on their feet or hands will be randomized into two groups: real biofield therapy versus sham therapy. The diagnosis will be made at the time of inclusion, and follow-up will take place in week 3. Comparison of pictures of the warts at baseline and after 3 weeks will be used as the primary outcome measure. The hypothesis is that the extent of the disappearance of the original wart in the group treated by real biofield therapy will be 70% and that it will be 30% in the group treated by sham therapy. Using 90% power and an alpha risk of 5%, 31 subjects are required in each group for a two-tailed proportion comparison test. To our knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate the efficacy of biofield therapy on warts. Therefore, the aim of this study is to extend knowledge of biofield therapy to another area of medicine such as dermatology and to propose complementary or alternative practices to improve patient well-being. The main strength of the study is that it is a randomized, single-blind, assessor-blind, placebo-controlled study. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02773719 . Registered on 22 April 2016.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 50 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 18%
Student > Bachelor 8 16%
Researcher 7 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Professor 3 6%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 16 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 18%
Psychology 7 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Sports and Recreations 2 4%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 16 32%