Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24235862›Full record

ArticleJournal of ginseng research2013

A new validated analytical method for the quality control of red ginseng products.

Il-Woung Kim, Kyu-Min Cha, Jae Joon Wee, Michael B Ye, Si-Kwan Kim

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of ginseng research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 37% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Il-Woung KimDepartment of Biomedical Chemistry, Konkuk University, Chungju 380-701, Korea.
Kyu-Min Cha
Jae Joon Wee
Michael B Ye
Si-Kwan Kim
Konkuk University · KRKT&G (South Korea) · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The main active components of Panax ginseng are ginsenosides. Ginsenoside Rb1 and Rg1 are accepted as marker substances for quality control worldwide. The analytical methods currently used to detect these two compounds unfairly penalize steamed and dried (red) P. ginseng preparations, because it has a lower content of those ginsenosides than white ginseng. To manufacture red ginseng products from fresh ginseng, the ginseng roots are exposed to high temperatures for many hours. This heating process converts the naturally occurring ginsenoside Rb1 and Rg1 into artifact ginsenosides such as ginsenoside Rg3, Rg5, Rh1, and Rh2, among others. This study highlights the absurdity of the current analytical practice by investigating the time-dependent changes in the crude saponin and the major natural and artifact ginsenosides contents during simmering. The results lead us to recommend (20S)- and (20R)-ginsenoside Rg3 as new reference materials to complement the current P. ginseng preparation reference materials ginsenoside Rb1 and Rg1. An attempt has also been made to establish validated qualitative and quantitative analytical procedures for these four compounds that meet International Conference of Harmonization (ICH) guidelines for specificity, linearity, range, accuracy, precision, detection limit, quantitation limit, robustness and system suitability. Based on these results, we suggest a validated analytical procedure which conforms to ICH guidelines and equally values the contents of ginsenosides in white and red ginseng preparations.

Indexed as

Panax ginsengQuality controlQuantitative analytical methodReference materialValidation

Identifiers

PMID24235862
PMCPMC3825863
OpenAlexW2167580441

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.