Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27761074›Full record

ArticlePharmacognosy magazine2016

Hussein M Ageely, Ahmed E Agag, Syam Mohan, Atef Shehata

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmacognosy magazine, 2016. 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
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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. Article
  2. Unraveling theFrontiers in pharmacology · 2021
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Pharmacognosy magazine · 2017
    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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Hussein M AgeelyDepartment of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Jazan University, Jazan, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Ahmed E AgagDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Jazan University, Jazan, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Syam MohanMedical Research Centre, Jazan University, Jazan, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Atef ShehataDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, Faculty of Medicine, Suez Canal University, Ismailia, Egypt; Department of Microbiology and Immunology, Faculty of Medicine, Jazan University, Jazan, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Jazan University · SASuez Canal University · EG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundKhat (

objectiveIn this study, Madin-Darby Bovine Kidney cell line was used as an MATERIALS AND

methodsTrypan blue assay, phase-contrast microscopy, fluorescent microscopy, clonogenic assay, annexin-V assay, and hematoxylin and eosin (H and E) staining were employed to check the objectives.

resultsReductions in cellular viability were observed at concentrations above 1.25 mg/ml while using Trypan blue assay. The results of the clonogenic assay had shown that the untreated control with the highest number of colonies (100% survival) and the 0.1562 concentration could not prevent the colony formation significantly. The high concentrations reduced the colony formation at concentration dependent manner 27.4% and 24.9%, for 0.625 mg/ml and 1.25 mg/ml concentrations, respectively. The acridine orange/ethidium bromide experiment had observed the cells were intact with round nucleus while the apoptosis features such as blebbing and nuclear chromatin condensation were clearly observed in treatment. The shrinkage of cells was clearly observed in H and E staining.

conclusionIn addition, annexin-V binding confirmed the presence of apoptosis significantly on Khat treatment. SUMMARY: Khat (

Indexed as

ApoptosisCatha eduliskhatkidney toxicity

Identifiers

PMID27761074
PMCPMC5068123
OpenAlexW2523961753

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.