ArticleHeliyon2024
Isolation of methyl caffeate and flacourtin from
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Material and methods: The dried coarse plant powder was extracted with methanol and dried with a rotary evaporator. Then, the plant extract was subjected to phytochemical screening using various test reagents. Furthermore, extracts were investigated for isolating and characterizing chemical compounds and some of their biological activities. Results: The chloroform fraction of the methanolic extract of Flacourtia jangomas (MEFJ) yielded methyl caffeate and flacourtin, the first ever reported from this plant. Secondary metabolites were found via phytochemical screening, and total phenolic content was assessed. MEFJ was compared to BHT in the DPPH experiment for antioxidant potential. The brine shrimp lethality assay showed MEFJ's greater cytotoxicity than vincristine sulfate. Compared to streptokinase, increasing concentration increased thrombolytic activity and clot lysis. Compared to ciprofloxacin, F. jangomas did not exhibit substantial antibacterial activity (P < 0.001). The antifungal activity is not significant compared to Griseofulvin under the same conditions (P < 0.001). MEFJ stabilized membranes better than diclofenac sodium. The 400 mg/kg group inhibited acetic acid-induced analgesia by 70.32 %, but the control group did not. MEFJ at 200 mg/kg relieved pain better than the reference drug and 400 mg/kg in the hot plate test. This indicates the need for additional research. Conclusion:
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.