ArticleResearch in pharmaceutical sciences2020
Antinociceptive activity of
Article in Research in pharmaceutical sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- The hepatoprotective effects of the polyphenol-enriched n-butanol fraction ofToxicology reports · 2025Article
- Targeting L-arginine/NO/cGMP/KFrontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
- Effects of Chaerophyllum macropodum Boiss. leaves essential oil in inflammatory and neuropathic pain: uncovering the possible mechanism of action.Inflammopharmacology · 2023Article
- Simultaneous determination and characterization of flavonoids, sesquiterpene lactone, and other phenolics from Centaurea benedicta and dietary supplements using UHPLC-PDA-MS and LC-DAD-QToF.Journal of pharmaceutical and biomedical analysis · 2022Article
- Effects of intrathecal and intracerebroventricular microinjection of kaempferol on pain: possible mechanisms of action.Research in pharmaceutical sciences · 2021Article
- Plant-derived natural products targeting ion channels for pain.Neurobiology of pain (Cambridge, Mass.)Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposeEXPERIMENTAL APPROACH: In this study, pain assessment tests include writhing, tail-flick (TF), and formalin- induced paw licking test (FIPLT) were used. To understand the possible mediated anti-nociceptive mechanism of CBHE, the opioid mechanism(s), and involvement of the L-arginine/ nitric oxide/cGMP/ATP-sensitive potassium channel pathway (LNCaP) were scrutinized. FINDINGS/
resultsIn TF and writhing tests, CBHE (150 and 300 mg/kg, i.p) remarkably exhibited an anti-nociceptive effect compared to that of the control. Furthermore, CBHE (150 and 300 mg/kg, i.p) in comparison with the control showed a noteworthy anti-nociceptive effect ( CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Taken together, we elucidate that both CBHE and cnicin demonstrated antinociceptive effects in behavioral tests. The possible mechanisms of CBHE antinociception may involve in various neural signaling and modulatory pathways including LNCaP and opioidergic mechanisms.
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.