ArticleNaunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology2025
Critical analysis of Echinacea preparations marketed in Germany.
Article in Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology, 2025. 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.
- From Phytochemical Diversity to Clinical Translation: Preparation-Dependent Bioactivity ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Pharmacological Insights and Technological Innovations inPharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Innovative Approaches to Extracting Phenolics fromFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Colds are the most common cause of incapacity to work in 2023 and therefore have a significant impact on the German economy. Echinacea preparations are considered a non-specific immune stimulant that is used as a phytotherapeutic agent for the treatment and prevention of colds. In the 2021 ZEIT ranking of the best-selling pharmacy-only medicines in Germany, four Echinacea preparations were among the top ten, and they experienced a new hype during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. In this study, 22 Echinacea monopreparations, which are approved as herbal medicinal products, were analyzed based on their package inserts. The preparations used in clinical studies were compared with the preparations available on the market with regard to the criteria of plant species used, plant part used, preparation (extract or pressed juice), drug-extract ratio, single dose administered, standardization of the preparations, prior performance of an ingredient analysis, galenics, dosage, duration of administration, and daily dose administered. The analysis revealed that the preparations available on the market are very heterogeneous. The composition can vary considerably in terms of ingredients. For customers, these products appear homogeneous in terms of their presentation on the market. The legal framework conditions promote this situation. The clinical studies are also unable to adequately reflect the market situation. New studies based on market reality, with an analysis of ingredients in the preparations used, a standardized study design, and the inclusion of hematological and biochemical parameters in the evaluation should improve this situation. Days of incapacity for work as an outcome parameter could be well suited.
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.