Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32498413›Full record

ArticleAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2020

Anti-Infectious Plants of The Thai Karen: A Meta-Analysis.

Methee Phumthum, Henrik Balslev

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
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

2 authors.

Methee PhumthumDepartment of Pharmaceutical Botany, Faculty of Pharmacy, Mahidol University, Bangkok 10400, Thailand.
Henrik BalslevDepartment of Biology, Faculty of Natural Science, Aarhus University, 8000 Aarhus, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-7101-7120

Funding

Carlsbergfondet CF14-0245
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Pharmacology has developed many drugs to treat infections, but many people, especially in developing countries, cannot afford to purchase them, and still depend on traditional knowledge and local medicinal plants to fight off infections. In addition, numerous microbes have developed resistance to the pharmaceutical drugs developed to fight them, and for many, such as Covid-19, effective drugs remain to be found. Ethnomedicinal knowledge is useful, not only for local people as a source of medicine for primary health care, but also for new pharmacological discoveries. This study aimed to identify the plants that the Karen, the largest hill-tribe ethnic minority in northern and western Thailand, use for treatments of infectious diseases. We present a meta-analysis of data from 16 ethnobotanical studies of 25 Karen villages with the aim of understanding traditional knowledge and treatments and point to potential plants for further pharmacological development. The Karen used 127 plant species from 59 plant families to treat infections and infectious diseases. The Cultural Important Index (CI) showed that the Leguminosae, Euphorbiaceae, Asteraceae, Lauraceae, Apocynaceae, Menispermaceae, and Lamiaceae were the most commonly used families. As for species,

Indexed as

antimicrobialbacterialCleidion javanicumethnobotanyethnomedicinal plantsfungalinfectious diseasesLitsea cubebaTinospora crispaviral

Identifiers

PMID32498413
PMCPMC7345792

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.