ArticleAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2020
whISOBAX
Article in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Natural bioactive gallic acid shows potential anticancer effects by inhibiting the proliferation and invasiveness behavior in human embryonic carcinoma cells.Molecular medicine reports · 2025Article
- The Effect of Tannin-Rich Witch Hazel on Growth of ProbioticAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Evaluation of a Witch Hazel Extract for the Potential Prebiotic and Protective Effect on SelectFrontiers in nutrition · 2022Article
- Optimization Method for Phenolic Compounds Extraction from Medicinal Plant (Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
As bacteria are becoming more resistant to commonly used antibiotics, alternative therapies are being sought. whISOBAX (WH) is a witch hazel extract that is highly stable (tested up to 2 months in 37 °C) and contains a high phenolic content, where 75% of it is hamamelitannin and traces of gallic acid. Phenolic compounds like gallic acid are known to inhibit bacterial growth, while hamamelitannin is known to inhibit staphylococcal pathogenesis (biofilm formation and toxin production). WH was tested in vitro for its antibacterial activity against clinically relevant Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria, and its synergy with antibiotics determined using checkerboard assays followed by isobologram analysis. WH was also tested for its ability to suppress staphylococcal pathogenesis, which is the cause of a myriad of resistant infections. Here we show that WH inhibits the growth of all bacteria tested, with variable efficacy levels. The most WH-sensitive bacteria tested were
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.