ArticleScientific reports2022
Novel metallomic profiling and non-carcinogenic risk assessment of botanical ingredients for use in herbal, phytopharmaceutical and dietary products using HR-ICP-SFMS.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Essential and toxic elements intake from botanical extracts: a probabilistic risk-benefit evaluation within the Italian dietary context.Journal of the science of food and agriculture · 2026Article
- Assessment of Toxic Metal Contamination and Consumer Safety of Medicinal Plants in Al-Diwaniyah Herbal Shops.Biological trace element research · 2026Article
- Exploring the Therapeutic Potential and Toxicological Risks of Four Ethnomedicinal Plants from Hakkâri (Southeastern Turkey): A First Comprehensive Analytical and Microstructural Evaluation.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Cadmium toxicity in medicinal plants: An overview of the tolerance strategies, biotechnological and omics approaches to alleviate metal stress.Frontiers in plant science · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Knowledge of element concentrations in botanical extracts is relevant to assure consumer protection given the increased interest in plant-based ingredients. This study demonstrates successful multi-element investigations in order to address the lack of comprehensive profiling data for botanical extracts, while reporting for the first time the metallomic profile(s) of arnica, bush vetch, sweet cicely, yellow rattle, bogbean, rock-tea and tufted catchfly. Key element compositions were quantified using a validated HR-ICP-SFMS method (µg kg
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.