ArticleOpen access Macedonian journal of medical sciences2017
Antigenotoxic and Antioxidant Activity of Methanol Stem Bark Extract of
Article in Open access Macedonian journal of medical sciences, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of Antioxidant Activity and Dose-Dependent Effect on Genotoxicity/Antigenotoxicity ofPharmaceutics · 2025Article
- Bioactivity and modulatory functions ofToxicology reports · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background
aimThe study was conducted to evaluate the antigenotoxic and antioxidant activities of methanol stem bark extract of MATERIALS AND
methodThirty male Sprague Dawley rats were randomly divided into group 1 (control) administered 10 mL/kg distilled water, groups 2 and 3 were co-administered 100 mg/kg, 200 mg/kg of
resultsThe LD50 oral was greater than 4 g/kg. There were significant (p < 0.0001) increases in plasma enzymatic and non-enzymatic antioxidant enzymes and significant (p < 0.0001) decrease in percentage micronuclei in bone marrow of extract treated rats compared to rats administered 5 mg/kg CPA alone. There was steatosis pointing to cytotoxic injury in the liver of rats co-administered 200 mg/kg NV and 5 mg/kg CPA. Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry analysis of the extract showed the presence of phytol and unsaturated fatty acids.
conclusion
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.