Background: The 2018 Declaration of Astana identifies traditional knowledge (TK) as one of the drivers for strengthening primary health care systems through the use of technology (traditional medicines) and knowledge and capacity building (traditional practitioners). While TK underpins both traditional practice and the use of traditional medicines, facilitating the use of TK in contemporary health care systems has been difficult to achieve. The aim of this study was to identify key factors related to the translation of TK into contemporary settings to help establish tools to support the knowledge translation process. Methods: This study used World Café methodology to collect the observations, ideas, and perspectives of experts who use TK in their practice. These experts (n = 9) were from a variety of contexts, including clinical practice, research, education, policy, and consumer advocacy, participated in the 1-day event. Data were collected into NVivo 12 software and analyzed using inductive-deductive thematic analysis. Results: Thematic analysis identified five themes: the need to define the elements required for critical evaluation of sources of TK as evidence, the importance of applying a tradition-centric lens when translating TK for contemporary use, the need to bridge gaps between TK and its contemporary applications, the value of critically evaluating the TK translation process itself, and the recognition of traditions as living systems. Taken together, the themes showed holistic interpretation of the translation process that incorporates critical analysis of the TK itself and accountable, transparent, and ethical processes of translation that consider safety, socioeconomical and intellectual property impacts of TK in contemporary use. Conclusions: Stakeholders identified TK as a valid and important source of evidence that should guide practice in a range of contemporary settings (e.g., policy and clinical practice), and outlined important consideration for critiquing, evaluating, communicating, and using TK within these settings.

Red yeast rice (RYR) has demonstrated neuroprotective effects in animal studies. The aim of this study was to access the efficacy of RYR for treatment of depression in patients with recent history of percutaneous coronary intervention.This was a 6-week double-blind placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial.Participants included outpatient men and women aged 18 to 60 years old with history of coronary angioplasty, diagnosis of major depressive disorder based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-V), and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) score of ≥20. Candidates were excluded in case of any other DSM-V disorders, use of lipid lowering agents in the last two weeks, elevated serum aminotransferases or serum LDL ≤ 80 mg/dL.Patients received sertraline (200 mg/day) plus either red yeast rice commercially available capsules (2400 mg/day) containing 10.05 mg/day lovastatin or placebo.The primary outcome was the difference in mean change of the HDRS score from baseline to endpoint between the two treatment arms.The primary outcome approached significance (Mean difference in score change(CI95%) = −1.24 (−2.51 to 0.03), p = .056) and was accompanied by a significant time × treatment interaction effect [Two-way ANOVA: F (df, mean square) = 4.42 (2, 13.687), p = .015]. There was no significant difference between the two treatment arms in terms of lipid profile, liver function tests, or incidence of adverse events.This is the first report on the benefits of RYR in treatment of depression. Future studies are warranted to confirm our findings and scrutinize the mechanisms of action.

Homeopathic education standards are regulated by a range of variable practices in different countries. Professional organisations commonly regulate courses without statutory support for this task. Statutory enforcement of educational standards (with/without statutory registration of practitioners) is relatively uncommon. The development of professional standards in homeopathic education has increased in recent decades; however, most systems remain voluntary and provide guidance rather enforce requirements. Educational standards include a significant degree of commonality in homeopathic knowledge and skills, with larger variations in biosciences, social sciences and research methodology. Homeopathic prophylactic techniques are an exception to this commonality, and are rarely well addressed in educational guidelines despite the attention they receive within the community. Public health and infectious disease training is similarly inadequately addressed as underpinning knowledge for prophylactic prescribing approaches in practice.