ArticleChinese medicine2025
Comparative analysis of Chinese classical prescriptions and global traditional polyherbal formulations: insights from the database of global polyherbal formulation (GPFD).
Article in Chinese medicine, 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Polyherbal formulations (PHFs) serve as a cornerstone of traditional medical systems worldwide and remain integral to diverse therapeutic practices. The COVID-19 pandemic has reinvigorated scientific interest in PHFs, driving extensive investigations into their composition and pharmacological potential. In this study, we systematically analyzed PHFs across major traditional medical systems, including Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), Kampo, Ayurveda, and Unani. To facilitate comprehensive analysis, we developed the Global Polyherbal Formulation Database (GPFD), a repository documenting formulation names, sources, historical evolution, ingredient composition, dosages, medicinal origins, and therapeutic applications. Leveraging this extensive dataset, we conducted a cross-system comparative analysis of PHFs using statistical analysis and data integration approaches. Our investigation focused on plant usage frequency and co-occurrence patterns to uncover underlying principles of formulation design. This study establishes a research framework for PHFs, explores the relationship between species selection, and ecological distributions, and identifies key taxonomic differences in plant utilization across systems. Additionally, we reveal distinct preferences in herbal combinations within each system, highlighting both shared and unique formulation patterns. These findings provide critical insights into the cross-cultural utilization of PHFs and offer a data-driven foundation for integrating traditional botanical knowledge into modern pharmacological research and drug development.
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.