Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35740124›Full record

ReviewAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2022

The Potential of α-Mangostin from

Omer Sheriff Sultan, Haresh Kumar Kantilal, Suan Phaik Khoo, Amalraj Fabian Davamani, Sumaiya Zabin Eusufzai, Farah Rashid, Nafij Bin Jamayet, Jue Ann Soh, Yen Yee Tan, Mohammad Khursheed Alam

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Omer Sheriff SultanDivision of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, International Medical University, Kuala Lumpur 57000, Malaysia.
Haresh Kumar KantilalSchool of Medicine, International Medical University, Kuala Lumpur 57000, Malaysia.
Suan Phaik KhooDivision of Clinical Oral Health Sciences, School of Dentistry, International Medical University, Kuala Lumpur 57000, Malaysia.
Amalraj Fabian DavamaniSchool of Health Sciences, International Medical University, Kuala Lumpur 57000, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0001-7297-5948
Sumaiya Zabin EusufzaiSchool of Dental Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian 16150, Malaysia.
Farah RashidSchool of Dental Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kubang Kerian 16150, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0002-2017-2454
Nafij Bin JamayetDivision of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, International Medical University, Kuala Lumpur 57000, Malaysia.ORCID 0000-0003-4656-0946
Jue Ann SohLJ Lee Dental Clinic, Bandar Menjalara, Kuala Lumpur 52200, Malaysia.
Yen Yee TanDivision of Restorative Dentistry, School of Dentistry, International Medical University, Kuala Lumpur 57000, Malaysia.
Mohammad Khursheed AlamDepartment of Preventive Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Jouf University, Sakaka 72345, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0001-7131-1752
IMU University · MYUniversiti Sains Malaysia · MYJouf University · SA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This systematic review aims to evaluate the antimicrobial activity of α-mangostin derived from Garcinia mangostana against different microbes. A literature search was performed using PubMed and Science Direct until March 2022. The research question was developed based on a PICO (Population, Intervention, Control and Outcomes) model. In this study, the population of interest was microbes, α-mangostin extracted from Garcinia mangostana was used as exposure while antibiotics were used as control, followed by the outcome which is determined by the antimicrobial activity of α-mangostin against studied microbes. Two reviewers independently performed the comprehensive literature search following the predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. A methodological quality assessment was carried out using a scoring protocol and the risk of bias in the studies was analyzed. Reward screening was performed among the selected articles to perform a meta-analysis based on the pre-determined criteria. Case groups where α-mangostin extracted from Garcinia mangostana was incorporated were compared to groups using different antibiotics or antiseptic agents (control) to evaluate their effectiveness. A total of 30 studies were included; they were heterogeneous in their study design and the risk of bias was moderate. The results showed a reduction in microbial counts after the incorporation of α-mangostin, which resulted in better disinfection and effectiveness against multiple microbes. Additionally, the meta-analysis result revealed no significant difference (p > 0.05) in their effectiveness when α-mangostin was compared to commercially available antibiotics. α-mangostin worked effectively against the tested microbes and was shown to have inhibitory effects on microbes with antibiotic resistance.

Indexed as

antimicrobialGarcinia mangostanaα-mangostin

Identifiers

PMID35740124
PMCPMC9219858
OpenAlexW4281569360

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.