ArticleSystematic reviews2019
A protocol for systematic review of Plantago major L. effectiveness in accelerating wound-healing in animal models.
Article in Systematic reviews, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Role of ButirprostMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStudies have indicated that Plantago major L. (P. major) has therapeutic properties, such as anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, antifungal, immunostimulatory, and tissue regeneration. This plant species is assumed to provide potent tissue repair and healing in treatments of skin wound injuries, but the understanding of its effectiveness is still unclear. The systematic review proposed herein aims to assess effectiveness of P. major for wound healing in animal models.
methodsWe will conduct database searches in BVS, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, and CABDirect. Reviewers will independently evaluate titles, abstracts, and full-text articles retrieved from databases to identify potentially eligible studies. Relevant articles will be assessed for risk of bias and quality. The database searches will include analysis of wound healing rate through macroscopic evaluation, photo images, or calculation of the wound area retraction until the wound closure. Relevant data will be compiled for the capability and effectiveness of P. major treatments in accelerating wound healing. Random effects meta-analysis models will be employed to compare among groups based on outcome variables from studies reporting sufficient high-quality data. DISCUSSION: Results of this systematic review will be presented in a narrative synthesis form. They will provide a summary and clear understanding of the relevant current questions and evidences directly related to P. major effective tissue repair and healing. Outcomes of this systematic review will contribute with important information that could benefit future research efforts and potential applicability in humans. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019121962.
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.