ArticleScientific reports2025
Exploring the antioxidant and antimicrobial properties of five indigenous Kenyan plants used in traditional medicine.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Traditional antidiabetic medicinal plants of Himachal Pradesh: ethnomedicinal evidence and drug-discovery potential.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Defined by the World Health Organization (WHO) as indigenous knowledge and practices used for maintaining health and treating illnesses, traditional medicine (TM) represents a rich reservoir of ancient healing practices rooted in cultural traditions and accumulated wisdom over centuries. Five indigenous Kenyan plant species traditionally used in African TM, named Afzelia quanzensis, Azadirachta indica, Gigasiphon macrosiphon, Grewia bicolor, and Lannea schweinfurthii, represent a valuable resource in healing practices, yet their chemical composition and bioactivity remain understudied. To depict a primary bio-chemical characterization of these plants, their antioxidant and antimicrobial features have been evaluated by the use of methods validated in this context. G. bicolor, and G. macrosiphon were found to have great potential as sources of bioactive metabolites, such as chlorophyll a (1456.29 µg/ g DW; 1104.33 µg/ g DW), chlorophyll b (712.48 µg/ g DW; 443.31 µg/ g DW), and carotenoids (369.71 µg/ g DW; 300 µg/ g DW) as well as phenols (31.78 mg GAE/g DW; 27.54 GAE/g DW), and exhibiting high antioxidant activity, according to TEAC, DPPH and FRAP assays. Additionally, L. schweinfurthii and G. macrosiphon demonstrated antimicrobial activity against the Gram-negative bacteria E. coli, as well as against Gram-positive ones, S. aureus and B. subtilis.
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.