Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38173018›Full record

ArticleTropical medicine and health2024

A scoping review on efficacy and safety of medicinal plants used for the treatment of diarrhea in sub-Saharan Africa.

Moitshepi T A Plaatjie, ThankGod E Onyiche, Tsepo Ramatla, Johannes J Bezuidenhout, Lesetja Legoabe, Nthatisi I Nyembe, Oriel Thekisoe

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Tropical medicine and health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. UropathogenicAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  3. The GenusMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Moitshepi T A PlaatjieUnit for Environmental Sciences and Management, North-West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa.
ThankGod E OnyicheDepartment of Veterinary Parasitology and Entomology, University of Maiduguri, Maiduguri, 600230, Nigeria.
Tsepo RamatlaUnit for Environmental Sciences and Management, North-West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa. ra21205450@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0473-8075
Johannes J BezuidenhoutUnit for Environmental Sciences and Management, North-West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa.
Lesetja LegoabePharmaceutical Chemistry, School of Pharmacy, North-West University, Potchefstroom, 2520, South Africa.
Nthatisi I NyembeDepartment of Zoology and Entomology, University of the Free State, Phuthaditjhaba, South Africa.
Oriel ThekisoeUnit for Environmental Sciences and Management, North-West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa.
North-West University · ZAUniversity of the Free State · ZAUniversity of Maiduguri · NG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), significant morbidity and mortality have been linked to diarrhea, which is frequently caused by microorganisms. A rise in antimicrobial-resistant pathogens has reignited the search for alternative therapies. This scoping review aims to map the literature on medicinal plants in relation to their anti-diarrheal potential from SSA.

methodsStudies published from 1990 until April 2022 on medicinal plants used for the treatment of diarrhea from each country in SSA were searched on Scopus, Web of Science, Science Direct and PubMed. The selection of articles was based on the availability of data on the in vitro and/or in vivo, ethnobotanical, and cross-sectional studies on the efficacy of medicinal plants against diarrhea. A total of 67 articles (ethnobotanical (n = 40); in vitro (n = 11), in vivo (n = 7), cross-sectional (n = 3), in vitro and in vivo (n = 2) and ethnobotanical and in vitro (n = 2), were considered for the descriptive analysis, which addressed study characteristics, herbal intervention information, phytochemistry, outcome measures, and toxicity findings.

resultsA total of 587 different plant species (from 123 families) used for diarrhea treatment were identified. Most studies were conducted on plants from the Fabaceae family. The plants with the strongest antimicrobial activity were Indigofera daleoides and Punica granatum. Chromatographic methods were used to isolate six pure compounds from ethyl acetate extract of Hydnora johannis, and spectroscopic methods were used to determine their structures. The majority of anti-diarrheal plants were from South Africa (23.9%), Ethiopia (16.4%), and Uganda (9%). This study highlights the value of traditional remedies in treating common human diseases such as diarrhea in SSA.

conclusionBaseline knowledge gaps were identified in various parts of SSA. It is therefore recommended that future ethnobotanical studies document the knowledge held by other countries in SSA that have so far received less attention. Additionally, we recommend that future studies conduct phytochemical investigations, particularly on the widely used medicinal plants for the treatment of diarrheal illnesses, which can serve as a foundation for future research into the development of contemporary drugs.

Indexed as

DiarrheaEthnobotanicalsMedicinal plantsScoping reviewSub-Saharan Africa

Identifiers

PMID38173018
PMCPMC10763068
OpenAlexW4390571063

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.