ArticleOpen access Macedonian journal of medical sciences2019
Neuroprotective Activity of
Article in Open access Macedonian journal of medical sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Targeting ROCK Isoforms by Natural Phytocompounds: An In-Silico Approach to Modulate Mitochondrial Fission and Mitophagy in Neurological Diseases.Neuroinformatics · 2026Article
- The Role of Herbal Medicines in Cognitive Impairment: A Narrative Review of Neuroprotective Mechanisms and Therapeutic Perspectives.Nutrients · 2026Review
- Review
- Comprehensive Insights into Pathophysiology of Alzheimer's Disease: Herbal Approaches for Mitigating Neurodegeneration.Current Alzheimer research · 2024Review
- Biochemical analysis of methanolic extract fromBioinformation · 2023Article
- Article
- Natural Therapeutics in Aid of Treating Alzheimer's Disease: A Green Gateway Toward Ending Quest for Treating Neurological Disorders.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Review
- Indian Medicinal Herbs and Formulations for Alzheimer's Disease, from Traditional Knowledge to Scientific Assessment.Brain sciences · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo carry out the comparative nootropic, neuroprotective potentials of two medicinal plant species. MATERIAL AND
methodsFor neuroprotective activity; behavior models (elevated plus maze & morris water maze), in vivo antioxidant (superoxide dismutase, catalase, lipid peroxidation & reduced glutathione), inflammatory markers (IL-1β, IL-6 & TNF-α) and acetylcholine esterase (AChE) assessment procedures followed at different dosages i.e. 250 & 500 mg/kg of Evolvulus alsinoides and Centella asiatica ethanolic extracts. At the end of the study, it was performed histopathological analysis of the following organs: brain, heart, liver, and kidney.
resultsIn oral administration of different doses of ethanolic extracts of both medicinal plants i.e. Sco + EEA 250 = 2.49 ± 0.29 , Sco + EEA 500 = 2.67 ± 0.36, Sco + ECA 250 = 2.33 ± 0.17, Sco + ECA 500 = 2.77 ± 0.21, Sco + EEA + ECA 250 = 2.61 ± 0.32 and Sco + EEA + ECA 500 = 2.79 ± 0.16 U/mg of protein respectively against the scopolamine induced group Sco (control) = 5.51 ± 0.35 U/mg of protein extracts shows neuroprotective and nootropic activity with reducing AChE level in the brain homogenate of swiss albino mice.
conclusionSince the
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.