Predicting Homeopathic Treatment Outcomes Systematically in Chronic Diseases: Development of Version 2 of the Patient Response Assessment Tool after Homeopathic Treatment (PRATHoT) by Mixed-Methods Research

The Patient Response Assessment Tool after Homeopathic Treatment (PRATHoT) was a preliminary attempt to categorize the treatment outcomes after an individualized homeopathic prescription in chronic diseases using centesimal potencies. Our project was aimed at improving it further, and this paper reports the development of version 2.0 of the tool by a staged process of item development and tool construction.An exploratory, sequential, qual → QUAN mixed-methods study design was adopted. The study was divided into three phases: Phase I: Item development (qualitative); Phase II: Tool construction (both qualitative and quantitative); Phase III: Tool validation (quantitative). Items were generated deductively using literature review and in-depth interviews (IDIs) with five experts. Items were finalized after thematic analysis. The tool components were checked for face validity, converted into a questionnaire to seek consensus using a 4-point Likert scale (1: not relevant at all; 4: highly relevant) through iterative Delphi rounds from another panel of five experts, selected by non-probabilistic purposive sampling. Content validity was examined; a cut-off was set at a content validity ratio (CVR) of 1.0. The tool was configured and pilot tested by 15 end-users. Tool validation (Quan) will be reported separately.Initially, 57 items were generated after a literature review, further extended to 75 items after completing the IDIs and thematic analysis. Content validity from Delphi round responses identified only 23 items having CVR = 1; however, a panel meeting recommended retention of all 75 items for their conceptual importance. The items were mapped into interpretative categories, resulting in PRATHoT v2.0. Five main themes were identified, each containing several related sub-themes that covered various factors such as aggravations and healing effects.A consensus-derived tool was developed for systematic categorization of the probable outcomes. The tool is ready for field testing and formal validation in diverse clinical conditions.