Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22620854›Full record

SynthesisJournal of natural products2012

Analysis and purification of bioactive natural products: the AnaPurNa study.

Guido F Pauli, Shao-Nong Chen, J Brent Friesen, James B McAlpine, Birgit U Jaki

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of natural products, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Overview on Strategies and Assays for Antibiotic Discovery.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. The Essential Medicinal Chemistry of Cannabidiol (CBD).Journal of medicinal chemistry · 2020
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. The Essential Medicinal Chemistry of Curcumin.Journal of medicinal chemistry · 2017
    Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Guido F PauliDepartment of Medicinal Chemistry and Pharmacognosy, College of Pharmacy, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60612, USA. gfp@uic.edu
Shao-Nong Chen
J Brent Friesen
James B McAlpine
Birgit U Jaki

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Based on a meta-analysis of data mined from almost 2000 publications on bioactive natural products (NPs) from >80000 pages of 13 different journals published in 1998-1999, 2004-2005, and 2009-2010, the aim of this systematic review is to provide both a survey of the status quo and a perspective for analytical methodology used for isolation and purity assessment of bioactive NPs. The study provides numerical measures of the common means of sourcing NPs, the chromatographic methodology employed for NP purification, and the role of spectroscopy and purity assessment in NP characterization. A link is proposed between the observed use of various analytical methodologies, the challenges posed by the complexity of metabolomes, and the inescapable residual complexity of purified NPs and their biological assessment. The data provide inspiration for the development of innovative methods for NP analysis as a means of advancing the role of naturally occurring compounds as a viable source of biologically active agents with relevance for human health and global benefit.

Indexed as

Biological ProductsChromatographyHumansBiological Products

Identifiers

PMID22620854
PMCPMC3381453

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.