ReviewHNO2011
[Phytomedicine in otorhinolaryngology - evidence-based medicine with medicinal plants].
Review in HNO, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Phytomedicine has become an increasingly important treatment option for patients in the western world. Patients who experienced failure or adverse reactions with conventional western medicine often switch to natural and holistic methods. In eastern countries, with their long history of traditional medicine, patients often resort to herbal preparations as the majority of western medicines are unaffordable. The desire of western physicians for evidence-based medicine also applies in the sector of phytomedicine. A serious perception of natural products in scientific medicine can therefore only be based on data from prospective, controlled, randomized double-blind clinical trials. In order to illuminate the present scientific foundation of effective and reliable phytomedicine, a literature search in PubMed (Medline) was conducted based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. The main focus was on the field of otorhinolaryngology. Besides the presentation of selected, reliable studies and the evaluation of the efficacy of various medicinal plants, shortcomings of selected publications are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22159338What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.