ArticleJournal of traditional and complementary medicine2022
Revisiting traditional Chinese materia medica from European historical collections and perspective for current use.
Article in Journal of traditional and complementary medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and aim: Chinese Materia Medica (CMM) is subject to changes over time. Investigating changes in botanical ingredients, applications, plant parts used as well as name changes over time, contribute to the understanding of the history and development of CMM. Materials and methods: This study compares four historic collections of CMM, located in Europe, compiled between 1700 and the late 19th century, with a list of contemporary CMM marketed in Europe. Results: More than 1700 specimens within these five collections. The dominant families are Fabaceae (5.3-7.2%) and Asteraceae (4.1-5.7%), while half of the medicinal parts are represented by roots or rhizomes and fruits and/or seeds. Their importance has been stable in a time span of 300 years. The proportion of animal and mineral drugs gradually decreased over time. 14 plant species appeared in all five collections. A total of 47 species are shared between the three more recent collections and the modern trade list. Among these common species, most medicinal parts remain unchanged, but for several species the used plant parts changed or new medicinal plant parts appeared. All common species have unanimously been used in ancient classical TCM formulae and/or Chinese patent medicines. Conclusions: Over more than 300 years, the main body of CMM has hardly changed, with regard to plant taxa and plant parts used. The most prominent changes are related to conservation issues of threatened species, health safety and the discovery of new pharmacological applications of well-known species. Analyzing physical specimens from historic CMM collections complements literature-based research.
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.