ArticleMolecular medicine reports2020
Preparation and quality evaluation of a volatile oil microemulsion from Flos magnoliae and Centipeda minima.
Article in Molecular medicine reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Food-Grade Microemulsion for High-Loading Octacosanol: Formulation Optimization, Characterization, and Biological Evaluation.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Neocnidilide and 6-Gingerol as Key Bioactives in Fresh and DriedInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Formulation of Aucklandiae Radix Extract-Loaded Nanoemulsions and Its Characterization and Evaluations In Vitro and In Vivo.Applied biochemistry and biotechnology · 2023Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In order to improve the water solubility of the volatile oils extracted from Flos magnoliae (FM) and Centipeda minima (CM), they were prepared as a microemulsion (ME), which were then used in the development of an FM and CM volatile oil ME for the treatment of allergic rhinitis (AR). ME was prepared by phase inversion emulsification, and the prescription factors such as emulsifier, co‑emulsifier, oil phase, Km, which represents the ratio of the mass of emulsifier to that of the co‑emulsifier, and preparation factors such as temperature affecting the formation of the ME were selected according to the formation area of ME in a pseudo‑ternary phase diagram. The quality of the ME was evaluated based on its appearance, particle size, Zeta potential and stability. The content of eucalyptol in ME was determined by gas chromatography‑mass spectrometry (GC‑MS). The cumulative permeability of the ME within 24 h was measured with a transdermal diffusion tester. The results revealed that the best formula for preparation of the ME was as follows: Castor oil polyoxyethylene ether (EL‑40) was the emulsifier; the co‑emulsifier was anhydrous ethanol; the Km was 2:1; the mixed phase of volatile oil and isopropyl myristate with mass ratio of 1:1 was used as oil phase; and the preparation temperature was 25˚C. The content of eucalyptol in the ME was 2.57 mg/g, and the cumulative permeability of the ME in 24 h was significantly increased compared with that of the reference oil solution. The appearance of the ME was uniform, and the solution was transparent. In conclusion, compared with traditional preparations, FM and CM volatile oil ME is a novel, improved and more effective preparation for the treatment of AR.
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.