ArticleBMC complementary medicine and therapies2024
Ethnobotanical assessment of antidiabetic medicinal plants in District Karak, Pakistan.
Article in BMC complementary medicine and therapies, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantitative ethnobotany and evidence-based analysis of antidiabetic medicinal plants used in Biswanath district, Assam, India.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Phytochemical profiling and anti-diabetic study of hydroalcoholic leaf extract ofBiochemistry and biophysics reports · 2025Article
- Computational-experimental integration identifies potent carbohydrate-hydrolyzing enzyme inhibitors fromFrontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDiabetes is a leading health disorder and is responsible for high mortality rates across the globe. Multiple treatment protocols are being applied to overcome this morbidity and mortality including plant-based traditional medicines. This study was designed to investigate the ethnomedicinal status of plant species used to treat diabetes in District Karak, Pakistan. MATERIALS AND
methodsA semi-structured survey was created to collect data about traditionally used medicinal plants for diabetes and other ailments. The convenience sampling method was applied for the selection of informants. The collected data was evaluated through quantitative tools like frequency of citation (FC), relative frequency of citation (RFC), informant consensus factor (FIC), fidelity level (FL), and use value (UV).
resultsA total of 346 local informants were selected for this research. Out of them, 135 participants were men and 211 participants were women. Overall 38 plant species belonging to 29 plant families were used to treat diabetes. The most dominant plant family was Oleaceae having 11 species. Powder form (19%) was the most recommended mode of preparation for plant-based ethnomedicines. Leaves (68%) were the most frequently used parts followed by fruit (47%). The highest RFC was recorded for Apteranthes tuberculata (0.147). The maximum FL was reported for Apteranthes tuberculata (94.4) and Zygophyllum indicum (94.11) for diabetes, skin, and wounds. Similarly, the highest UV of (1) each was found for Brassica rapa, Melia azedarach, and Calotropis procera. Based on documented data, the reported ailments were grouped into 7 categories. The ICF values range between 0.89 (diabetes) to 0.33 (Cardiovascular disorders).
conclusionThe study includes a variety of antidiabetic medicinal plants, which are used by the locals in various herbal preparations. The species Apteranthes tuberculata has been reported to be the most frequently used medicinal plant against diabetes. Therefore, it is recommended that such plants be further investigated in-vitro and in-vivo to determine their anti-diabetic effects.
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.