ReviewHNO2025
[Evidence-based phytotherapy in otorhinolaryngology-the update].
Review in HNO, 2025. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFor centuries, phytopharmaceuticals were the primary form of medicine used worldwide to treat, alleviate, or prevent disease. Phytotherapy harnesses the therapeutic effects of plants and their components (phytopharmaceuticals). According to the World Health Organization (WHO), phytotherapy remains a crucial pillar of healthcare today and is expected to become even more important in the future. Referring to our initial review article from 2011, we now present an update to cover the period from 2011 to the present.
objectiveWhich phytopharmaceuticals are relevant in otorhinolaryngology, and is there evidence-based data supporting their use? MATERIALS AND
methodsA literature search was conducted for the period from 2011 to 2024 using PubMed (MEDLINE). The search results were further refined by focusing on randomized, clinical, and controlled trials written in English and adhering to Good Clinical Practice (GCP) guidelines.
resultsThe search term "phytotherapy" yielded 44,202 results. After limiting to 2011-2024 and applying the aforementioned criteria, 1685 results remained. With respect to otorhinolaryngology, only six studies remained. This procedure was applied to all search terms and otorhinolaryngology-specific search terms. Exclusion criteria included homeopathy, shamanistic medicine, case reports, studies not conducted according to GCP guidelines, and studies not written in English. The search term "traditional medicine" returned 275,079 results. After limiting to 2011-2024 and applying the aforementioned criteria, 6448 results remained. With respect to otorhinolaryngology, only two studies remained. The search term "Chinese medicine" returned 378,231 results. After limiting to 2011-2024 and applying the criteria, 7815 results remained. With respect to otorhinolaryngology, only one study remained. In total, 14 studies were selected and presented.
conclusionSince 2011, a substantial number of new studies on phytotherapy have been published. However, few studies utilize standardized measurement methods and materials, thus precluding objective statements. Such standardization is essential for practical therapeutic application. Due to the frequently inadequate adherence to GCP guidelines, there has been no significant gain in knowledge regarding the effects and efficacy of phytopharmaceuticals. Intensive clinical research is still required to adequately utilize phytotherapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40372423What 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.