A Review and
Brief Comparison of the Leading Repertory / Materia Medica Software
Programs
Will Taylor, MDThe computerization of our
homeopathic literature represents one of the most significant advances of
our profession in the 20th century. I find my homeopathic
software invaluable in daily clinical practice, in the continual
self-education so necessary in our profession, and in preparing materials
for teaching homeopathy.GHG Jahr wrote in 1867,
IT
was in the year 1827 when I made my debut in the practice of Homoeopathy,
at a time when the only resources at our command were the Materia Medica
Pura of the founder of our school and a few cures reported in Stapf’s
“Archiv” and in the “Praktischen Mittheilungen”. With
these scanty means we had to get along as well as we could, and, by a
diligent and attentive study of the drugs with whose pathogeneses we had
become acquainted at that time, familiarize ourselves with the
characteristic symptoms of each drug and its special indications, in order
to avail ourselves of them for therapeutic purposes in such case as might
present themselves for treatment. This was no small task, which could
never have been accomplished, if the Materia Medica of that time had
contained the large number of drugs that are offered at the present time
… But since the number of drugs known at that time, did not exceed
sixty, and among these only twenty had been proved with exhaustive
perseverance and correctness, we had it in our power to study them
thoroughly without too much trouble; to become fully acquainted with the
specific effects of each drug … to apply them as such in accordance with
their symptomatic indications … At this time such a careful study of our
Materia Medica is unfortunately no longer possible to the beginner in
Homoeopathy. Overwhelmed by the accumulated mass of drugs and clinical
observations, he scarcely knows which way to turn for at least one ray of
light in the chaos spread out before him …”We have in our literature
today some 400 reasonably well-described remedies, along with 1200+
additional remedies known only fragmentarily. The task of getting along by a
“diligent and attentive study” of our materia medica is today next
to impossible. We face the need to replace our 19th-century
reliance on “full acquaintance with the specific effects of each
drug”, with ready access to the resources of our literature.When Chris Kurz wrote his Battle
of the Repertories comparison article in 1996, he reflected a view
commonly held at the time, that beginning and intermediate students of
homeopathy would do best to steer away from the use of computerized
literature. Many homeopathic educators have discouraged the use of repertory
and materia medica software programs until proficiency is developed in using
printed-text references. The traditional skills of a homeopath include the
knowledge of repertory structure and familiarity with its content, and it is
feared that these skills might be neglected if reportorial software is
relied upon to “automate” case analysis. It has also been
suggested that “automated” case analysis using reportorial
software can invite the computer-age phenomenon of “GIGO” –
“garbage in, garbage out;” where the ease of data-input might
encourage repertorization of poorly-considered symptom collections, with
intermediate steps masked by the presumed authority of the computer.It may be true that the
use of stone tools reinforces the wisdom of “measuring twice and
cutting once.” Similarly, the labor required in printed-text
repertorization may provide a measure of safety in assuring that one is
careful to select a succinct collection of characterizing rubrics to
represent the totality of symptoms of a case.However, it is my
experience that one can suffer a fool with books as easily as with a
computer. I liken the resistance to adoption of the computer as a learning
tool in homeopathic education, to the early resistance to acceptance of the
stethoscope by the medical community. Computerized literature can
significantly change the way we address and use information. This comes with
a new set of benefits, along with a new set of risks; but risks in the use
of our literature are nothing new to us.Use of the repertory on
the computer may actually facilitate learning its structure and
familiarizing its content, allowing the user to gradually develop an organic
understanding of repertory structure and content gained in daily use.
Consultation of our material medica on computer permits more ready
comparative study and greatly facilitates consulting multiple authors.Several computerized
repertory / material medica packages have been developed over the past 20
years. For the purposes of this article, I have investigated the three
packages in most widespread use by professional homeopaths: CARA Pro 1.4
from Miccant; Mac Repertory 5.6.0 Pro Version / ReferenceWorks 2.6.3 from
Kent Homeopathic Associates; and RADAR 8.1 / Encyclopedia Homeopathica 1.3
from Archibel.At the outset, it is
important to state that none of these programs “finds the remedy”
for a case; the tasks of casetaking, the perception and organization of a
Totality of Characterizing Symptoms, the choice of reportorial rubrics to
represent this totality of symptoms, the differential consideration of the
leading remedies and the ultimate choice of a simillimum remain tasks for
the carefully observant practitioner. In similar manner, the tools of a
carpenter do not build a house; they extend her grasp, make it much easier
to drive nails, bore holes and judge a plumb line. A hammer in unskilled and
ignorant hands can smash thumbs, mar wood and assist in the construction of
an unsound house as easily as assist in the construction of a sound
dwelling.Each of these programs
represents a significant contribution to the homeopathic community. Each has
its own set of strengths and weaknesses; in reading the points of comparison
below, it may be important to reflect on your individual wants and needs,
and compare these with the relative strengths and shortcomings of each
software package.
Help
Yeah, I know that real
guys don’t use it; but easy access to help can not only solve problems of
use, but also can facilitate the learning of shortcuts and power-user
functions. These programs differ considerably in their onscreen and
supportive help literature.CARA
MacRepertory, ReferenceWorks
RADAR, Encyclopedia Homeopathica
Limited onscreen help.
No onscreen help. Ships with extensive
manual.Extensive searchable,
context-sensitive help. Screenshots linked from the text illustrate
features.Text-based manuals include a
comprehensive manual, a Quick Tour manual, and a Frequently Asked
Questions pamphlet.Professionally videotaped weekend
training session available.
Repertory(-ies)
The three repertory
programs use different repertory databases. All allow mixing/matching of
rubrics from their various repertories in a single analysis.CARA
MacRepertory
RADAR
Combined – Kent, Synthetic, addn’s
from Vithoulkas & SherrComplete, Phatak, Boericke,
Boenninghausen, Julian, Allen, Clarke, MurphyThe Complete
Murphy’s
Extensive collection of historical
repertoriesSynthesis
Synthesis Views*
Murphy’s
Kent
Boenninghausen’s Therapeutic
Pocketbook, Boenninghausen’s Repertory of the Antipsoric Remedies,
Boger-Boenninghausen Repertory (German; translation to English
promised soon)The Complete Repertory
(Roger vanZandvoort) and Synthesis (Frederik Schroyens) are the
cutting-edge works of homeopathic repertory development.* Even with the earliest
repertories, a tension has existed between the need for the repertory to be inclusive
and the need to be reliable. Clearly there are gray-zones to both
realms. Many of Jan Scholten’s additions, e.g., fall into the realm of
speculative deduction, but may nevertheless prove valuable in the analysis
of certain cases. Other practitioners may wish to rely only on repertory
entries which have withstood the test of considerable time, and choose to
ignore additions more contemporary than Pierre Schmidt. With version 8+ of
the Synthesis Repertory, Frederik Schroyens has introduced the
novelty of permitting multiple views of the repertory. The Full Synthesis
in versions 8.0 and beyond includes additions from modern provings and
clinical experience that some might find questionable. If one wishes to
restrict repertory entries to sources judged more classically reliable,
at the expense of excluding some material of more experimental nature, a
restricted view may be selected – either while browsing the repertory for
rubrics, or directly in the analysis window. Several stock views are
provided to choose from, and the user can use the view-editor function to
create and save their own custom views. Views are changed instantly from a
drop-down menu in the repertory title-bar, and any of the views may be set
as the default view by the user.
Locating, Finding and
Selecting RubricsI consider this one of the
most critical tasks of a repertory program. The practitioner familiar with
their repertory will appreciate speed and ease in finding and selecting
known rubrics. Those who are learning the structure and content of their
repertory can benefit from quick and easy searching for unknown rubrics, and
particularly for clusters of rubrics with similar meaning. All three of
these repertory programs offer striking advantages over using a paper
repertory in ease of locating and searching for rubrics; RADAR stands well
ahead of the pack in these features.
Finding a known rubric
e.g., you wish to find the
rubric Mind, fear, nightCARA
MacRepertory
RADAR
Press F2 to open the search
dialog windowSelect the Mind chapter
An empty search opens the Browse
Repertory view in the selected chapterType fe to go to Mind,
fearScroll down to Mind, fear,
nightMouseover to the “mind” icon
and click on itType fe to go to fear
within the Mind sectionClick on Mind, fear to open
list of subrubrics (or press Ctrl-Y to toggle subrubrics open)Scroll down list of subrubrics to find
Mind, fear, nightType:
mi
fe
ni
Finding a rubric of unknown wording
e.g., you know that there
is a rubric about not being able to tolerate horrible things or
situations, but you can’t recall how it’s wordedCARA
MacRepertory
RADAR
Press F2 to open the search
dialog windowSelect the Mind chapter
Type horrible in the search
field
all searches are rather slow; the
first search each time the repertory-view is re-opened is extremely
slowType:
Ctrl-E
For the repertory search window
Type:
horrible
in the word-search field
A preliminary-results window appears,
displaying the number of “hits” within each chapter of the
repertory. Click next to Mind to select this chapter. Select
the clipboard you’d like to receive the rubrics found.
Rubrics in the Mind section
containing the word horrible will appear in the chosen
clipboard. The desired rubric(s) can then be moved to the clipboard
you’re using for analysis, the others erased. Double-clicking on a
rubric will take you to that rubric in the repertory view.Type:
? horrible
A window will open with a list of
rubrics containing the word horrible. The desired rubric(s) may
be imported directly to an analysis clipboard. Double-clicking on any
of the rubrics in this list will take you to that rubric in the full
repertory view.
Cross-references between related rubrics
– e.g., in the
repertory, Mind, fastidious may be cross-referenced to Mind,
conscientious about trifles to remind you to look as well at this rubric
of closely-related meaningCARA
MacRepertory
RADAR
Feature not available
Cross references may be listed in
parentheses after a rubric. Ctrl-click links to the FIRST
cross-reference only; subsequent cross-references are not linked, and
serve only as text reminders.Links to cross-referenced rubrics
appear in red, with an arrow icon, following the referring rubric.
Double-clicking on any of these links will take you to the
cross-referenced rubric. You can also select one or more of the
cross-referenced rubrics directly from these links, either
individually, or in combination with the referring rubric. Users may
easily modify the cross-reference list, adding their own.
Searching for “concepts”
e.g., you may wish to find
rubrics related to obsessive behavior. Mind, obsessive …
does not produce any rubrics. A search for obsessive fails as well.
Can you locate any rubrics that might have something to do with
obsessiveness?CARA
MacRepertory
RADAR
Feature not available
Feature not available
Type:
??obsessive
A window opens, displaying the
Concepts file:
RADAR Concepts – Psychological
disorders – obsessive compulsive neurosisDouble-click on the book icon
accompanying this, and a window opens up displaying a list of rubrics
related to the concept of obsessive-compulsive behaviors.Several concepts files are
incorporated into the program – including Fonseca’s
Semiological Guide, Servais’ Themes, Zulian’s Index,
RADAR Concepts, RADAR Acute diseases, and Mateu’s First
AidConcepts files may also be accessed
from individual rubrics. E.g., the rubric Mind, counting
continually is followed by a concepts (lightbulb) icon; clicking
on this brings up a list including the concepts file RADAR Concepts
– Psychological disorders – obsessive compulsive neurosis.Concepts files may be modified by the
user. E.g., the rubric MIND – REST – cannot rest when things are
not in the proper place could easily be added to the above RADAR
concepts file by the user.
Author references
I like to know where my information
comes from. Repertory additions attributed to Jahr or Hering demand greater
attention for me than those from Gallavardin.CARA
MacRepertory
RADAR
Author references are dispayed as a
footnoted number; clicking on the number or on the remedy brings up
the reference.Authors references may be displayed as
either numbers or abbreviations (select from the Options menu). The
full name of the author (but not the source of the reference) may be
obtained by consulting the integrated Authors and Remedies
application.Author references may be enabled or
disabled through the Repertory Window Options dialog. References
appear as a colored footnote after the remedy. Double-clicking on the
reference will open a window displaying the author’s full name and
the source of the reference.
Moving a rubric into an
analysis clipboardCARA
MacRepertory
RADAR
With the rubric selected, either
double-click or pressor
Right-click on the rubric, and from
the drop-down menu, select Take
Rubricor
Drag the rubric to the chosen
clipboardA confirmation dialog box may be
enabled/disabled (in the program preferences). Choices are offered
here for underlining, choosing the clipboard, and designating the
rubric as eliminative or causal for the analysis.Rubrics may be imported to a clipboard
from a repertory chapter view or a find list. Only one rubric can be
added at a time; even if it appears that you have selected multiple
rubrics from a Find list.With the rubric highlighted, press
to add to the default clipboard
or
Drag the rubric to the chosen
clipboardRubrics may be imported to a clipboard
from the repertory view, or dragged from another clipboard (e.g., from
a search result clipboard)With the rubric selected, type:
+n
where n = the degree of
underlining you wish (1-10)To direct the rubric to a specific
clipboard (other than the default clipboard), type:
+n>C
where C = 1-10 to indicate
clipboard 1-10
or
Drag the rubric to the chosen
clipboard
or
With the rubric selected, click on one
of the clipboard icons in the command bar (labeled 1, 2 or 3) to add
to the default clipboard underlined once, twice, or three times
respectively.Rubrics may be imported to a clipboard
from the main repertory view, from a chapter view, or from any search
result window. From a search result window, any number of selected
rubrics may be imported simultaneously. From the main repertory view,
a referring rubric may be imported along with any number of
simultaneously selected cross-referenced rubrics.All three of these
programs greatly simplify the task of finding and collecting rubrics of both
known and unknown wording, over the use of a paper repertory. This is where
the user will spend most of their time in the program in day-to-day use; and
robustness, ease of use, and elegance of implementation of these tasks is of
high importance. For this active/interactive searching, instant
responsiveness is required of the program. I found CARA unacceptably slow in
locating and searching for rubrics. MacRepertory required scrolling and
mouseclicks, with optional keyboard entry for only portions of these tasks.
RADAR’s full implementation of keyboard-entry locating and searching
functions sets it clearly in the lead when it comes to ease in locating,
finding, and selecting rubrics for an analysis. RADAR’s concept-level
search function adds an additional level of robustness in the ability to
find unknown rubrics that may apply to a patient’s symptom.
Organizing the analysis
Editing / Qualifying
rubrics– e.g. setting
underlining, designating as eliminative, causal, &c.CARA
MacRepertory
RADAR
Underlining, elimination easily
performed within the rubrics clipboardsUnderlining easily performed.
Elimination is performed by
selecting/highlighting the eliminative rubric(s), prior to analysisRubrics may be crossed out (by
pressing “–” when highlighted) to appear in the analysis
graph, without entering into the analysis calculations.Underlining, elimination easily
performed. Rubrics may receive an underline value of 0 to be appear in
the analysis graph, without entering into the analysis calculations.A causal designation is
significant only in analysis via the Vithoulkas Expert System.
Combining rubrics
– e.g., in a given case, it is not clear whether the patient is
best-described with Fastidious, Conscientious about trifles,
or Rest, cannot, when things are not in their proper place; so you’d
like to combine these into one more-inclusive rubric.CARA
MacRepertory
RADAR
Rubrics may be combined after they are
collected in a clipboard. CARA uniquely offers the ability to uncombine
previously combined rubrics – select the previously created combined
rubric, click the Uncombine icon, and the originating rubrics are
restored.Rubrics may be combined either as they
are being added from the Repertory view, or later after being
collected in a clipboard. The identities of the contributing rubrics
are lost in the combined rubric; the original rubrics can be saved and
placed in a spare clipboard, if desired.Eliminative or crossed rubrics can
also be created – listing only those remedies common to 2 or
more originating rubrics.3 options exist for combining rubrics:
- Leave the individual rubrics
intact, but calculate them as if they were combined into one
rubric;- Create a single inclusive rubric,
but leave the contributing rubrics in the analysis, weighted 0 so
that they may be seen, but are disregarded in the analysis
calculations;- Create a single inclusive rubric,
discarding the contributing rubricsOptions 2 & 3 are performed on
rubrics after they are collected in the rubrics clipboard.Option 1 may be performed after the
rubrics are collected, or as they are being added to the clipboard
from the Repertory View, Chapter View, or Find window.Eliminative or crossed rubrics can
also be created – listing only those remedies common to 2 or
more originating rubrics. These act like Option 1 above – the
originating rubrics will remain in the analysis, but will enter in to
the calculations as if they were crossed (behaving like one rubric
with only those remedies common to the contributing rubrics)
Summary
– once rubrics are selected and imported into analysis clipboards, the
three programs are closely comparable in their abilities to organize the
collected rubrics for analysis; though these are implemented in somewhat
differing manners.
Display of the analysis
Basic graphic display
CARA
MacRepertory
RADAR
Waffle and bar graph displays are
available.Waffle display may indicate remedy
grade by color, number or both.Some limited customization is
available; changing waffle size, colors, flat/3D appearance, font of
text.Sized to display average rubric
length; long rubrics are cut off.Many display options – very
attractive graphics, most appealing for presentation work. In the
Waffle graph, one can slide the graph right to allow room for long
rubrics that would be cut off otherwise; or slide the graph left to
permit more of the analysis to be viewed.Graphic displays include:
Waffle graph (grade indicated
by either color or number)Bar graph
Multigraph (displaying
multiple weighting methods in bar graph display)Multigraph (displaying
multiple clipboards in bar graph display)Clipboards to be included in
the analysis may be selected by clicking on/highlighting the rubrics
clipboards; additional clipboards may be included by cntl-clicking on
them.Many different custom graphs
may be designed, with many options possible. E.g., a 2-dimensions
scatter graph of totality on one axis, and small remedies on the other
axis.Some graphs seem to be fun,
but of questionable actual usefulness – e.g., city graph, state of
matter graphSee also Families analysis,
below.The basic display is a waffle graph,
with remedy grade indicated by either color or number. The rubrics may
be listed either to the left, and inline with the graph, or in a
separate list above the graph. These options are toggled from icons on
the graphic display. Text and waffle size may be simultaneously
decreased/increased from icons on the graphic display, to permit
better viewing of analyses of different sizes.A multiple bar-graph display allows
simultaneous viewing of several weighting schemes (see Weighting of
analysis, below).Clipboards to be included in /
excluded from the analysis may be selected from an analysis
preferences window.See also Special analyses, below –
re the Vithoulkas Expert System and Herscu Cycles/Segments module
displays.MacRepertory is the hands-down
winner for presentation-quality graphics. All three programs provide
perfectly adequate graphic displays for practitioner use.
Weighting of analysis
– analysis scheme
CARA
MacRepertory
RADAR
Basic weighing strategies are
available.A great variety of weighting
strategies are available from the Analyze and Limit menus; these may
be selected individually or in any combination. Custom weighting
schemes may be constructed based on individualized recipes.A multigraph may be selected to
display multiple weighing schemes side-by-side, in bar-graph display.A two-dimension scatter graph may be
set up to display 2 weighting schemes on x- and y-axes.Icons on the graphic display can be
used to select among 8 different weighting schemes; any one of these
may be set as the default scheme. Schemes include:Sum of symptoms
Sum of symptoms, sorted by
degreeSum of degrees
Sum of degrees, sorted by
symptomsSum of symptoms & degree
Small rubrics
Small remedies
Prominence
The graphical analysis window displays
6 of these weighting schemes side-by-side (#s 2, 4, 5,6,7,8 of the
above list) in bar-graph displays.
Special analyses
CARA
MacRepertory
RADAR
No comparable feature available.
No comparable feature available. See,
however, Families-based analysis, below.Vithoulkas Expert System*
Herscu Module – Cycles and Segments*
*see discussion, below
The Vithoulkas Expert System is a
sophisticated analysis module which applies a complex set of algorithms to
the rubrics you’d selected, modeling the case-analysis strategies of
George Vithoulkas. It will often bring up some remedy suggestions that were
not at all obvious in a conventional repertorization. I find this an
extremely valuable adjunct to case analysis, and my one gripe about it is
that its logic is not transparent to the user – so I am not immediately
privy to the logic that brings up Strophanthus as a strong candidate
in the VES, when it came up only as high as 77th position in any
of the traditional weighting schemes. I do find such situations tremendously
stimulating though, and attempting to re-create the reasoning leading to
such a result is an excellent learning experience. One other gripe – not
really with this module, but with what it will tolerate a fool to do – can
be summed up with the computer-lingo expression GIGO – garbage in, garbage
out. The VES will tell you if you have failed to underline rubrics in the
manner it requires, or if you are particularly deficient in modalities or
sensations; but it will not tell you if you have failed to organize your
case adequately, failed to select rubrics representative of a truly
characterizing totality, etc. For someone not taking care in these earlier
stages of case analysis, there is the potential risk of hiding behind the
virtual authority of the computer and its software. Certainly this risk
exists as well with conventional repertorization, even when based in text
and paper; but here the lack of transparency of the computer’s logic can
more effectively mask these deficiencies of preparation.The Herscu module is based on Paul
Herscu’s approach to working with Cycles and Segments. For those
acquainted with this method of case analysis it may be used in a
“free” mode, where symptoms are clustered into clipboards by the
user, with the module called in only at the final point of analysis.
Optionally, it can also step you through the analysis in a
question-and-answer based manner, organizing your selection and placement of
rubrics to suit the method. The Herscu Cycles and Segments approach
satisfies two major issues in case analysis: (1)it provides a framework for
organizing the Totality of Characterizing Symptoms as a composition,
satisfying Stuart Close’s assertion that the totality must express an
idea which unites the symptoms in a special manner and gives them its
characteristic form; and (2)it provides a mechanism for addressing the
incompleteness and uneven representation of knowledge of our remedies within
the repertory.The presence of these 2 analysis
modules is a strong selling-point for RADAR.
Families analysis
CARA
MacRepertory
RADAR
A repertorization may be restricted to
a given family, from menus available in the Analysis Options window.Mineral families (elements, periodic
table rows or columns) may be selected from a Periodic Table
interface, or from a menu.Plant and animal families may be
selected from the hierarchical Classes menu.The Plant and Animal family groupings
are in need of some work.The algorithms involved in CARA’s
Family analysis are similar to those that drive the hierarchical
pie-graph Families module of MacRepertory and the Families analysis in
RADAR.A repertorization may be easily
restricted to the Minerals, Plant, or Animal Kingdom, using icons on
the chart window.A repertorization may be restricted to
a given family (plant family, element, periodic table row or column,
etc.) by selecting the family from a drop-down menu.A very interesting feature of
MacRepertory is the ability to ask for a repertorization by family
(from a pull-down menu) – so that instead of seeing how individual remedies
fare in the analysis, the analysis graph displays how individual
families cover the repertorization. Repertorization may be
restricted to all “Family” groups, or to Miasms, Plant
Chemicals, Vega’s Boxes, Five Elements correlations, Planets
correlations, Boyd’s families, Rows & Columns of the Periodic
Table, Plant Elements, or Major Plants.(Those
in italics in the above list appear to offer the greatest potential
for practical use).
If a family name is clicked on in this
graph, a window will pop up displaying an analysis restricted
to that family.I find two concerns with this feature.
If All Families are selected for a Families analysis, the graph tends
to become too inclusive, with too many non-useful higher orders of
classification cluttering up the graph; and I find the convention for
naming plant families to be somewhat irregular.A hierarchical Families analysis is
also available. This begins with a Pie graph of major Family Group
divisions. The protocol for generating this graph and those that link
from it (see below) is dependent on how many remedies belonging to
each group show up in the reportorial analysis – unlike the more
useful Families implementation above. Thus a family with several
members present in the analysis will score well; whether any of these
remedies do well in the analysis on their own, and regardless whether
the family as a group covers the case well. (This is similar to the
Families Analysis protocols in CARA and RADAR, and though it is more
nicely implemented here, it is subject to the same concerns brought up
for those programs).Clicking on the Minerals segment of
the pie graph will display a Period Table, with the elements, rows and
columns that score well in the analysis displayed in the deepest
colors. Clicking on an element, row or column will bring up a window
displaying an analysis restricted to that element, row or
column.Plants, Animals and Imponderables are
similarly set up with hierarchical schemes suited to those groupings
of remedies. As with the CARA and RADAR Families analysis, the upper
levels of taxonomic classification through which one has to wade
before coming to meaningful family groups obscures the usefulness of
this feature.A repertorization may be restricted to
a given family (Kingdom, plant family, element, periodic table row or
column, etc.) by selecting the family from a menu window opened from
an icon in the command bar.“Family” groupings include
Kingdoms
Plant families and higher taxonomic
levelsAnimal families and higher taxonomic
levelsElements
Periodic Table rows and columns
Bowel nosodes
Boyd’s groups
Dorsi’s Diatheses and Notions
Five Elements
Miasms
Nosodes
State of Matter
Teste’s groups
Families also include an extensive
list of Remedy Relations, including Remedies that Follow (a given
remedy) Well, Complementary Remedies, &c.RADAR contains an extensive Families
Repertory, which serves as the database for the analysis restrictions
above. It may also be consulted independently, by opening it up as the
front-most repertory, and using the locating, searching and extracting
features of the RADAR program.RADAR also sports an Analysis by
Families module. The algorithms involved are similar to those that
drive the hierarchical pie-graph Families module of MacRepertory and
the Families implementation in CARA.
Summary
– Families-based analysis is clearly an up-and-coming focus for many
homeopathic practitioners, and serviceable families analysis protocols are a
potentially valuable feature of any repertory program. MacRepertory has the
current edge in this category, with both the ability to restrict an analysis
to a chosen family, and to repertorize by family – which is particularly
functional when restricted to the Rows & Columns of the Periodic
Table, or to the Major Plants families. RADAR shares the ability
to restrict an analysis to a chosen family, but currently lacks a functional
repertorize by family function. CARA’s family implementation
requires significant work on its families database. The Analyze by Family
modules of CARA and RADAR, and the hierarchical Families module of
MacRepertory, utilize protocols that do not appear to be of great utility in
practice.
Search Functions
CARA
MacRepertory
RADAR
F2 brings up the Search dialog window.
Cntrl-E brings up the Repertory Search
dialog window. Remedies to be searched on may be entered in the
Remedies field on the left; words to be searched on may be entered in
the Word field on the right.AND, OR and NOT operators are
available both in the Remedies and Word fields. One return after an
entry will create a second field with an AND operator; two returns
will create a second field with an OR operator. Clicking on the
plus-sign preceding a field will toggle it from + to -, indicating
respectively AND or NOT as the operator.F4, or extended search from the
Search menu, brings up the Search dialog window. Complex Boolean
searches are available onWords, Roots & Branches of words,
Synonyms, Remedies, and repertory Chapters, in any combination
including nested AND, OR, & AND NOT operators. Searches are
indexed, and very fast. Search commands are literal & intuitive.Search results are produced in a
Result of Search window; the rubrics found may be looked over, and all
or selected ones imported to a rubrics clipboard.
Interface of Repertory
with Materia MedicaCARA
MacRepertory
RADAR
CARA Pro contains a selection of
homeopathic books more extensive than the Keynote/Confirmatory materia
medica selections in MacRepertory or RADAR, but considerably less
extensive than the collections in the associated materia medica
programs from those developers (ReferenceWorks and Encyclopedia
Homeopathica). These are easily referenced from the analysis window of
the program.Several Keynote/Confirmatory materia
medica texts are integrated into the program. These may be opened to
any given remedy selected in an analysis, by dragging the name of the
remedy from the analysis window to a keynote icon.KHA’s materia medica program,
ReferenceWorks, can produce rubrics from word-searches that may then
be imported into the MacRepertory repertory program and used in an
analysis. These searches cannot be edited; so a search for “fear
of dogs” might include “he has no fear of dogs”.Keynote/Confirmatory material medica
texts integrated into the program include Boericke, Allen’s
Keynotes, and the RADAR keynotes which are largely based on Vithoulkas’
teachings. These may be opened to any given remedy selected in an
analysis, by dragging the name of the remedy from the analysis window
to a keynote icon.Archibel’s materia medica program,
Encyclopedia Homeopathica, can produce rubrics from word-searches that
may then be imported into the RADAR repertory program and used in an
analysis. Unlike ReferenceWorks, these searches can be easily edited,
allowing one to remove references such as “he has no fear of
dogs” from a search for “fear of dogs”.RADAR and Encyclopedia Homeopathica
also integrate in the other direction. From the analysis window in
RADAR, clicking on a single icon will extract the critical words from
the rubrics in use, and send this complex search to the materia medica
program – performing a parallel analysis.
Patient Records
CARA
MacRepertory
RADAR
CARA’s analysis functions are built
around a very throrough patient database program.MacRepertory saves rubrics lists,
analysis graphs, notes and simple visit data in a simple but very
straightforward patient file system.RADAR can save analyses to a
collection of folders for easy future retrieval. Patient records –
including rubrics clipboards and analysis graphs exported directly
from RADAR, along with extensive visit data – are handled in the
linked application WinChip, which is a full-featured patient database
program.
Summary
These three software packages all
represent significant contributions to the homeopathic community. All offer
prominent advantages over the use of printed literature, for purposes of
case analysis, self-study, and teaching. None will substitute for careful
observation and astute reasoning on the part of the practitioner;
computerization takes over those tasks that involve non-creative drudgery,
and permits rapid, flexible and creative use of our resource materials.Each of these packages has its own
set of strengths and weaknesses. MacRepertory excels in its presentation
graphics, and currently holds an edge in its implementation of
Families-analysis work. RADAR excels in the use-critical tasks of speed and
access in finding rubrics, including rapid, simple searches, concepts
searches, and cross-references between related rubrics. The implementation
of alternative views of the Synthesis repertory, and two-way interaction
with the associated Encyclopedia Homeopathica program are strong features of
RADAR. CARA is a less complex program that performs the basic tasks of
repertorization and literature access well, but sacrifices speed, ease of
use and some bells and whistles to economy.We have come a very long way from
Jahr’s 1827, “when the only resources at our command were the Materia
Medica Pura of the founder of our school and a few cures reported in Stapf’s
“Archiv” and in the “Praktischen Mittheilungen”.”
With careful attention to our calling to be carefully observant clinicians,
the computerization of our literature can offer us the tools to bring
homeopathy into its presence as a truly 21st-century medicine.Will
Taylor, MD
April 2002
Copyright © Will
Taylor 2002