ArticleAdvances in integrative medicine2022
Safety and tolerability of Pau d' Arco (
Article in Advances in integrative medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- The gap between prevalence of primary dysmenorrhea and available treatment strategies.Reproduction & fertility · 2026Review
- Anti-Inflammatory and Regenerative Properties of Herbal Extracts: Wound Management in Equine Models.Drug target insightsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate the safety and tolerability of encapsulated Methods: A single arm, open-label trial was conducted in which 1050 mg/day of encapsulated Results: Seventy-five percent of participants (n = 9/12) completed the study. Seventy-five percent of study participants (n = 9/12) reported an adverse event, most of which were characterized as mild, and none were determined to be a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) serious adverse event. Most laboratory markers stayed within normal limits throughout the study period with a few clinically mild abnormalities. There was a significant decrease in pain intensity compared to baseline after the first dose (p < .01), after 4 weeks of treatment (p < .01), and after 8 weeks of treatment (p < .01). Over the 8-week intervention period, pain interference, quality of life, and sexual function and satisfaction scores improved nonsignificantly and hs-CRP decreased nonsignificantly. Conclusions:
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.