ArticleScientific reports2020
The safety profile of Bald's eyesalve for the treatment of bacterial infections.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Reviving the past for a healthier future: ancient molecules and remedies as a solution to the antibiotic crisis.Future microbiology · 2025Review
- Current alternative therapies for treating drug-resistantFuture microbiology · 2024Review
- A case study of the Ancientbiotics collaboration.Patterns (New York, N.Y.) · 2022Review
- Phase 1 safety trial of a natural product cocktail with antibacterial activity in human volunteers.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Anti-biofilm efficacy of a medieval treatment for bacterial infection requires the combination of multiple ingredients.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- From Treatise to Test: Evaluating Traditional Remedies for Anti-Biofilm Potential.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rise in antimicrobial resistance has prompted the development of alternatives to combat bacterial infections. Bald's eyesalve, a remedy used in the Early Medieval period, has previously been shown to have efficacy against Staphylococcus aureus in in vitro and in vivo models of chronic wounds. However, the safety profile of Bald's eyesalve has not yet been demonstrated, and this is vital before testing in humans. Here, we determined the safety potential of Bald's eyesalve using in vitro, ex vivo, and in vivo models representative of skin or eye infections. We also confirmed that Bald's eyesalve is active against an important eye pathogen, Neisseria gonorrhoeae. Low levels of cytotoxicity were observed in eyesalve-treated cell lines representative of skin and immune cells. Results from a bovine corneal opacity and permeability test demonstrated slight irritation to the cornea that resolved within 10 min. The slug mucosal irritation assay revealed that a low level of mucus was secreted by slugs indicating moderate mucosal irritation. We obtained promising results from mouse wound closure experiments; no visible signs of irritation or inflammation were observed. Our results suggest that Bald's eyesalve could be tested further on human volunteers to assess safety for topical application against bacterial infections.
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.