Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24367388›Full record

ReviewEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM2013

Traditional medicines in Africa: an appraisal of ten potent african medicinal plants.

M Fawzi Mahomoodally

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 171 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
171citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–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

171 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Scoping review of ethnobotanical studies onFrontiers in pharmacology · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Appraising the therapeutical potentials ofFrontiers in pharmacology · 2022
    Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. A review of the current anti-New microbes and new infections · 2026
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

111 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

1 author.

M Fawzi MahomoodallyDepartment of Health Sciences, Faculty of Science, University of Mauritius, 230 Réduit, Mauritius.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of medicinal plants as a fundamental component of the African traditional healthcare system is perhaps the oldest and the most assorted of all therapeutic systems. In many parts of rural Africa, traditional healers prescribing medicinal plants are the most easily accessible and affordable health resource available to the local community and at times the only therapy that subsists. Nonetheless, there is still a paucity of updated comprehensive compilation of promising medicinal plants from the African continent. The major focus of the present review is to provide an updated overview of 10 promising medicinal plants from the African biodiversity which have short- as well as long-term potential to be developed as future phytopharmaceuticals to treat and/or manage panoply of infectious and chronic conditions. In this endeavour, key scientific databases have been probed to investigate trends in the rapidly increasing number of scientific publications on African traditional medicinal plants. Within the framework of enhancing the significance of traditional African medicinal plants, aspects such as traditional use, phytochemical profile, in vitro, in vivo, and clinical studies and also future challenges pertaining to the use of these plants have been explored.

Identifiers

PMID24367388
PMCPMC3866779

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.