Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32211986›Full record

ReviewWiener klinische Wochenschrift2020

From St. John's wort to tomato and from Rhodiola to cranberry : A review of phytotherapy and some examples.

Verena Weixlbaumer, Lukas Draxler, Markus Zeitlinger, Benedikt Prantl

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Wiener klinische Wochenschrift, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 44% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Effect ofFood technology and biotechnology · 2023
    Article
  2. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Verena WeixlbaumerMedical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Lukas DraxlerMedical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Markus ZeitlingerDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Vienna University Hospital, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria. markus.zeitlinger@meduniwien.ac.at.
Benedikt PrantlMedical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Medical University of Vienna · ATVienna General Hospital · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study evaluated the definition, the prevalence of use and the governmental regulations of phytotherapy and four examples of herbal medicine are discussed in more detail.

resultsThis research group evaluated 4 topics: St. John's wort for treating (mild to moderate) depression, tomato extract as a platelet inhibitor, Rhodiola against stress-related fatigue and cranberries for the treatment of urinary tract infections.

conclusionThe findings were diverse and must be individually taken into account. Evidence for efficacy varies within and between the four examples. An explanation for the lack of reproducibility of findings from preclinical and clinical experiments might be the insufficient standardization of herbal medicines. There is no scientific reason why phytotherapy should not be investigated with the same rigor as conventional drugs to establish the efficacy and potential risks. Meanwhile, it is concluded that care is essential when using herbal medicine in the daily routine and informing patients about potential shortcomings and dangers of herbal medicines should be considered a duty of pharmacists and physicians.

Indexed as

HypericumRhodiolaSolanum lycopersicumVaccinium macrocarponHumansPhytotherapyPlant ExtractsReproducibility of ResultsPlant ExtractsEvidenceFood supplementPhytotherapyRandomized controlled trialTraditional medicine

Identifiers

PMID32211986
PMCPMC7253520
OpenAlexW3013907860

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.