Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34315377›Full record

ReviewCurrent neuropharmacology2021

The Safety and Efficacy of Botanicals with Nootropic Effects.

Amy L Roe, Arvind Venkataraman

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current neuropharmacology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Amy L RoePersonal Healthcare Division, The Procter & Gamble Company, 8700 Mason-Montgomery Road, Mason, OH, 45040, United States.
Arvind VenkataramanPersonal Healthcare Division, The Procter & Gamble Company, 8700 Mason-Montgomery Road, Mason, OH, 45040, United States.
Procter & Gamble (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent estimates for the global brain health supplement category, i.e. nootropic market size, will grow to nearly $5.8 billion by 2023. Overall, nearly one-quarter (23%) of adults currently take a supplement to maintain or improve brain health or delay and reverse dementia. Not surprisingly, the use of such supplements increases with age - more than one-third of the oldest generation (ages 74 and older) takes a supplement for brain health. This widespread use is being driven by a strong desire both in the younger and older generations to enhance cognitive performance and achieve healthy aging. The most prevalent botanicals currently dominating the nootropic marketplace include Gingko biloba, American ginseng, and Bacopa monnieri. However, other botanicals that affect stress, focus, attention, and sleep have also been procured by dietary supplement companies developing products for improving both, short and long-term brain health. This review focuses on efficacy data for neuroactive botanicals targeted at improving cognitive function, stress reduction, memory, mood, attention, concentration, focus, and alertness, including Bacopa monnieri, Ginkgo biloba, Holy basil, American ginseng, Gotu kola, Lemon balm, Common and Spanish sages and spearmint. Botanicals are discussed in terms of available clinical efficacy data and current safety profiles. Data gaps are highlighted for both efficacy and safety to bring attention to unmet needs and future research.

Indexed as

BacopaNootropic AgentsAdultAgedBrainCognitionDietary SupplementsHumansNootropic AgentsBotanicalscognitiondietary supplementsmental healthnootropicsafety.

Identifiers

PMID34315377
PMCPMC8762178
OpenAlexW3185068223

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.