Background: Dengue is a mosquito-borne viral infection in which most symptomatic cases are managed with careful clinical assessment, hydration, fever control, platelet/haematocrit monitoring, and prompt escalation when warning signs develop. Current public-health guidance does not recognize any specific curative antiviral treatment for dengue; therefore, any integrative intervention must remain adjunctive to standard supportive care and must not delay referral for warning signs or severe dengue. Objective: To present a clinical-audit analytical framework for adjunctive individualized homeopathy in non-severe dengue, using a simulated/anonymized demonstration dataset and an evidence-mapped discussion of symptom relief, platelet recovery, patient perception, and supportive-care outcomes. Methods: A simulated dataset of 120 adult non-severe dengue cases was generated because no real patient-level data were provided. Group A included 60 patients receiving standard supportive care only. Group B included 60 patients receiving standard supportive care plus individualized adjunctive homoeopathic prescription. Primary analytical outcomes were platelet count trends from baseline to Day 7, fever duration, time to defervescence, symptom scores, patient satisfaction, need for IV fluids, hospital referral/escalation, adverse events, and recovery by Day 7. Between-group comparisons used Welch t-tests, chi-square or Fisher exact tests, paired t-tests for within-group platelet change, and a linear mixed-effects model for platelet trend. Results: Baseline platelet counts were similar in the two simulated groups (Group A 87.36 +/- 20.13 x10^3/uL; Group B 87.85 +/- 18.15 x10^3/uL; p=0.888). In the simulated results, Day 7 platelet count was higher in Group B than Group A (mean difference 16.21 (5.86 to 26.56) x10^3/uL; p=0.002), and the group-by-time interaction for platelet trend was statistically significant (p=<0.001). Fever duration and time to defervescence were shorter in Group B in the simulated dataset. Safety indicators and referral outcomes did not show statistically significant group differences. Conclusion: The simulated analysis illustrates how an adjunctive individualized homoeopathy question can be reported without overstating causal claims. The findings are not clinical evidence of efficacy and should not be used for patient-care decisions. Real-world submission requires ethics approval, genuine patient-level data, diagnostic confirmation details, safety monitoring, and preferably a prospective controlled design. Standard supportive care and urgent referral for warning signs remain mandatory. Keywords: dengue; non-severe dengue; platelet count; individualized homoeopathy; supportive care; patient perception; community medicine; simulated dataset; clinical audit