In anthroposophic medicine, medical care and medicines are attuned to the individual, offering a holistic over and above regular allopathic treatment.. Empirical science plays a key role. Scientific research according to common comparative standards is not always appropriate.

Nevertheless anthroposophic medicine is working towards verifiable proof of effectiveness, building on its 85 year track record by fostering a multitude of research activities. Today, many research institutes and hospital research departments specialise in anthroposophic medicine, conducting laboratory research as well as clinical therapy studies. A large number of studies have been carried out on mistletoe therapy, a cancer treatment.

As with homeopathy, the Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) and connected models are not best suited to this type of research. Efforts are being made to develop suitable methods of research which are recognised as valid by the regular scientific community and allow for typical anthroposophic methods for diagnosis, choice of intervention and the evaluation of effects, such as the empirical component as well as the patient individuality.

In June 2005 a systematic analysis of 178 scientific studies into the effect and the cost effectiveness of anthroposophic medicine (Kienle 2004) concluded that anthroposophic medicine is good, effective, safe and probably cost effective. In 170 studies the result was either a total recovery or improvement of the symptoms or a quicker or more convincing improvement of the patient compared to no or another treatment.

In 2005, a pilot study by the Dutch Louis Bolk Institute (Baars 2005) concluded that patients are highly satisfied, in particular with the individualised treatment. There are strong indications that the anthroposophic approach is cost effective. Anthroposophic medicine scores well in dealing with the ‘top ten of complaints’, responsible for the most significant part of the so-called burden of disease.