ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2025
A quantitative comparative analysis of the
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 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nutritional Care in Traditional Mongolian Medicine: Historical Foundations and Conceptual Framework Development-A Historical Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Quantitative comparison of similarities and differences in medicinal materials used by Tibetan medicine and the three traditional medicines (6th-10th Century AD).Journal of ethnobiology and ethnomedicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ethnopharmacological relevance: In 2023, the classic work of Tibetan medicine, the Aim of the study: This study aims to reveal and compare the use of diets, medicinal materials and preparations as therapeutic means in the Materials and methods: ① Data mining: Relevant information on diets, medicinal materials, and preparations was extracted from the Results: ① Foods: The Conclusion: This study found both differences and commonalities in their therapeutic content. The both texts differ markedly in the total amount and classification of therapeutic content, with particularly striking differences in dietary types and sources of medicinal materials, reflecting the different ecological and cultural characteristics of the Tibetan Plateau and South Asia. At the same time, there is a partial overlap between the both texts, such as 9.9% of foods, 14.1% of drinks, and 13.8% of medicinal materials are shared, with a 48% similarity in their recorded efficacies. These findings provide an empirical basis for understanding the similarities and differences between Tibetan medicine and the Ayurvedic medical system, and open new perspectives for comparative studies of traditional medicine.
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.