SynthesisPloS one2017
Why do people use exotic plants in their local medical systems? A systematic review based on Brazilian local communities.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Biodiverse food plants in the semiarid region of Brazil have unknown potential: A systematic review.PloS one · 2020Pooled it
- The influence of exotic and native plants on illnesses with physical and spiritual causes in the semiarid region of Piauí, Northeast of Brazil.Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine · 2024Article
- Alien woody plants are more versatile than native, but both share similar therapeutic redundancy in South Africa.PloS one · 2021Article
- First large-scale ethnobotanical survey in the province of Uíge, northern Angola.Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine · 2018Article
- Stryphnodendron Species Known as "Barbatimão": A Comprehensive Report.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Efforts have been made to understand the processes that lead to the introduction of exotic species into local pharmacopoeias. Among those efforts, the diversification hypothesis predicts that exotic plants are introduced in local medical systems to amplify the repertoire of knowledge related to the treatment of diseases, filling blanks that were not occupied by native species. Based on such hypothesis, this study aimed to contribute to this discussion using the context of local Brazilian populations. We performed a systematic review of Brazilian studies up to 2011 involving medicinal plants, excluding those studies that presented a high risk of bias (because of sampling or plant identification problems). An analysis of similarities (ANOSIM) was conducted in different scales to test for differences in the repertoire of therapeutic indications treated using native and exotic species. We have found that although there is some overlap between native and exotic plants regarding their therapeutic indications and the body systems (BSs) that they treat, there are clear gaps present, that is, there are therapeutic indications and BSs treated that are exclusive to exotic species. This scenario enables the postulation of two alternative unfoldings of the diversification hypothesis, namely, (1) exotic species are initially introduced to fill gaps and undergo subsequent expansion of their use for medical purposes already addressed using native species and (2) exotic species are initially introduced to address problems already addressed using native species to diversify the repertoire of medicinal plants and to increase the resilience of medical systems. The reasons why exotic species may have a competitive advantage over the native ones, the implications of the introduction of exotic species for the resilience of medical systems, and the contexts in which autochthonous plants can gain strength to remain in pharmacopoeias are also discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.