Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29134131›Full record

ReviewFuture science OA2017

Medicinally important aromatic plants with radioprotective activity.

Ravindra M Samarth, Meenakshi Samarth, Yoshihisa Matsumoto

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Future science OA, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Evaluation ofPeerJ · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Underutilized PlantRussian agricultural sciences · 2023
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  14. Traditional Indian practices: Time to revisit and re-adopt for a healthier lifestyle.Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology · 2020
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Evaluation of essential oil obtained fromInfection and drug resistance · 2019
    Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

3 authors.

Ravindra M SamarthDepartment of Research, Bhopal Memorial Hospital & Research Centre, Department of Health Research, Government of India, Raisen Bypass Road, Bhopal 462038, India.
Meenakshi SamarthFaculty of Science, RKDF University, Airport Bypass Road, Gandhi Nagar, Bhopal 462033, India.
Yoshihisa MatsumotoTokyo Institute of Technology, Institute of Innovative Research, Laboratory for Advanced Nuclear Energy, N1-30 2-12-1 Ookayama, Meguro-ku, Tokyo 152-8550, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aromatic plants are often used as natural medicines because of their remedial and inherent pharmacological properties. Looking into natural resources, particularly products of plant origin, has become an exciting area of research in drug discovery and development. Aromatic plants are mainly exploited for essential oil extraction for applications in industries, for example, in cosmetics, flavoring and fragrance, spices, pesticides, repellents and herbal beverages. Although several medicinal plants have been studied to treat various conventional ailments only a handful studies are available on aromatic plants, especially for radioprotection. Many plant extracts have been reported to contain antioxidants that scavenge free radicals produced due to radiation exposure, thus imparting radioprotective efficacy. The present review focuses on a subset of medicinally important aromatic plants with radioprotective activity.

Indexed as

antioxidant activityaromatic plantsessential oilslymphocytesmiceradiation protectionradical scavenging activityrat

Identifiers

PMID29134131
PMCPMC5674267

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.