ReviewDatabase : the journal of biological databases and curation2023
New approaches in developing medicinal herbs databases.
Review in Database : the journal of biological databases and curation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- In silico discovery of natural compounds from Vietnamese essential oils database with target binding to cancer-related proteins.Molecular diversity · 2026Article
- Exploring the global mosaic of medicinal plant databases: unveiling nature's pharmacopoeia.Natural products and bioprospecting · 2026Review
- TCMToxDB: a comprehensive database for the toxicological analysis of traditional Chinese medicines.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2026Article
- Computational prediction and conformation of relationships among microbes, drugs and diseases.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Network pharmacology-based prediction and molecular docking-based strategy to investigate the potential mechanism of Leonurus japonicus Houtt. Against myocardial ischemia reperfusion injury.Journal of cardiothoracic surgery · 2025Article
- CMAUP database update 2024: extended functional and association information of useful plants for biomedical research.Nucleic acids research · 2024Article
- Microbial fortification of pharmacological metabolites in medicinal plants.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Medicinal herbs databases have become a crucial part of organizing new scientific literature generated in medicinal herbs field, as well as new drug discoveries in the information era. The aim of this review was to track the current status of medicinal herbs databases. Search for finding medicinal herbs databases was carried out via Google and PubMed. PubMed was searched for papers introducing medicinal herbs databases by the recruited search strategy. Papers with an active database on the web were included in the review. Google was also searched for medicinal herbs databases. Both retrieved papers and databases were reviewed by the authors. In this review, the current status of 25 medicinal herbs databases was reviewed, and the important characteristics of databases were mentioned. The reviewed databases had a great variety in terms of characteristics and functions. Finally, some recommendations for the efficient development of medicinal herbs databases were suggested. Although contemporary medicinal herbs databases represent much useful information, adding some features to these databases could assist them to have better functionality. This work may not cover all the necessary information, but we hope that our review can provide readers with fundamental concepts, perspectives and suggestions for constructing more useful databases.
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.