Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40426578›Full record

ArticleAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Conventional Antimicrobial and Medicinal Plants from a Traditional Medicine Market in South Africa: An Interactive Antimicrobial and Toxicity Study.

Zelna Booth, Sabiha Essack, Sandy van Vuuren

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors.

Zelna BoothDepartment of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, Faculty of Health Sciences, School of Therapeutic Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg 2000, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0001-7399-8666
Sabiha EssackAntimicrobial Research Unit, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban 4000, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0003-3357-2761
Sandy van VuurenDepartment of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, Faculty of Health Sciences, School of Therapeutic Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg 2000, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-4859-1845

Funding

National Research Foundation of South Africa: Thuthuka Grant TTK210401591599South African Department of Higher Education and Training: The University Capacity Development Programme USDP-JRF Grant
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe World Health Organization (WHO) has proposed the use of integrative medicine to achieve extended healthcare coverage in developing countries facing high morbidity. Traditional remedies are frequently employed to prevent and treat infections among South Africans; however, the ways in which they interact with conventional antimicrobials are largely unknown. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the interactions between commonly traded medicinal plants at a traditional medicine market in KwaZulu-Natal (KZN), South Africa, and conventional antibiotics and antifungals.

methodsTo determine the interactive antimicrobial profiles for plant/conventional antimicrobial combinations, minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) assays were performed against ESKAPE pathogens and the yeasts

resultsA total of 952 combinations were tested, of which 5.8% and 54.6% of the plant/antibiotic combinations were synergistic and antagonistic, respectively; additionally, 1.7% and 58.6% of the plant/antifungal combinations showed synergism or antagonism, respectively. The most toxic plant/antibiotic combination was

conclusionsWhen medicinal plants acquired from a traditional medicine market in South Africa are used in combination with conventional antibiotics and antifungals, more than half of the combinations exhibit antagonism, which is concerning.

Indexed as

antagonisticantibioticsantifungalsantimicrobial combinationsinteractionssynergistictoxicitytraditional medicinal plants

Identifiers

PMID40426578
PMCPMC12108390

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.