Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35097048›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in veterinary science2021

Bioassay Guided Fractionation of

Prosper Jambwa, Fikile N Makhubu, Gift Matope, Gerda Fouche, Lyndy J McGaw

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in veterinary science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. In Vitro Bioactivity of Leaf Extract Fractions and Quercetin-3-International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Review
  4. Heliyon · 2023
    Review
  5. Inhibitory activity of flavonoids fraction fromFrontiers in pharmacology · 2023
    Article
  6. GC-MS Analysis, Antibacterial and Antioxidant Potential of Ethyl Acetate Leaf Extract ofEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2022
    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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Prosper JambwaPhytomedicine Programme, Department of Paraclinical Sciences, University of Pretoria, Onderstepoort, South Africa.
Fikile N MakhubuPhytomedicine Programme, Department of Paraclinical Sciences, University of Pretoria, Onderstepoort, South Africa.
Gift MatopeDepartment of Veterinary Pathobiology, University of Zimbabwe, Harare, Zimbabwe.
Gerda FoucheDepartment of Paraclinical Sciences, University of Pretoria, Onderstepoort, South Africa.
Lyndy J McGawPhytomedicine Programme, Department of Paraclinical Sciences, University of Pretoria, Onderstepoort, South Africa.
Onderstepoort Veterinary Academic Hospital · ZAUniversity of Pretoria · ZAUniversity of Zimbabwe · ZW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There has been burgeoning interest in plant-based feed additives following restrictions placed on the use of antibiotic feed additives in many countries. Phytogenic feed additives are recommended to have a range of useful properties to support the growth and development of poultry to a similar level as that obtained by supplementing feed with antibiotics. The aim of this study was to evaluate the antibacterial, anti-lipoxygenase and antioxidant activity, and

Indexed as

antibacterialanti-lipoxygenaseantioxidantcytotoxicityphytogenicpoultry feed additivesSenna singueana

Identifiers

PMID35097048
PMCPMC8793064
OpenAlexW4226334418

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.