This overview aims to outline and clarify the different types of systematic review that have analysed the clinical research evidence in RCTs of homeopathy. In contrast to most discussions on this subject, it pays due regard to key characteristics of study design in the original RCTs that comprise the systematic reviews. Based on this clarified perspective of past research, future investigations can be focused more sharply and effectively.Those who evaluate homeopathy research tend to place greatest emphasis on systematic reviews of all medical conditions grouped together (comprehensive systematic reviews). However, the worth of such contributions – and therefore the relevance of their conclusions – is limited by the disparate modalities of homeopathy investigated and by the heterogeneous range of medical conditions being examined collectively. This brief appraisal highlights systematic reviews in which such heterogeneity has been avoided or reduced by focusing on a given medical diagnosis or group of related diagnoses. Importantly, this approach also recognises that some medical problems may be more or less responsive than others to homeopathic intervention.