Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40421213›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2025

Reevaluating the safety of chamomile poultices in ophthalmic care.

Tibor Rák, Adrienne Csutak

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Tibor RákDepartment of Pharmacognosy, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary.
Adrienne CsutakDepartment of Ophthalmology, Medical School - Clinical Centre, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: German chamomile [ Methods: This review examines the origins and descriptions of herbal poultices, with a focus on chamomile, by analyzing data from Hungarian and international medical literature. The study highlights the unsanitary production and storage conditions, also the external application of chamomile teas, which increase the risk of infection and contamination. Results: The findings indicate that chamomile tea poultices pose significant health risks due to potential allergic reactions and microbiological contamination. The study underscores the lack of scientific evidence supporting the ophthalmic use of chamomile and the dangers associated with its application. Discussion: The implications of these findings are critical for healthcare professionals and guideline developers. The study calls for discontinuing chamomile-based ophthalmic therapies and emphasizes the need for evidence-based practices. Future research should focus on validating the safety and efficacy of herbal remedies and developing guidelines to protect public health.

Indexed as

chamomileconjunctivitisherbal teahypersensitivityMatricaria recutitaocular poultice

Identifiers

PMID40421213
PMCPMC12104180

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.