Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41057911›Full record

ArticleChinese medicine2025

Comparative analysis of Chinese classical prescriptions and global traditional polyherbal formulations: insights from the database of global polyherbal formulation (GPFD).

Hongguo Chen, Zhaoyu Liu, Yupeng Du, Xiangxiao Meng, Liangliang Xue, Xiang Sun, Zhuangyuan Xie, Liping Chen, Fan Li, Ruolan Du and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

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

14 authors.

Hongguo Chen *State Key Laboratory of Quality Research in Chinese Medicine, Institute of Chinese Medical Sciences, University of Macau, Macao, 999078, China.
Zhaoyu Liu *Institute of Herbgenomics, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, 611137, China.
Yupeng Du *Key Laboratory of Saline-alkali Vegetation Ecology Restoration (Northeast Forestry University), Ministry of Education, Harbin, 150040, China.
Xiangxiao MengState Key Laboratory for Quality Ensurance and Sustainable Use of Dao-di Herbs, Key Laboratory of Beijing for Identification and Safety Evaluation of Chinese Medicine, Institute of Chinese Materia Medica, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, 100070, China.
Liangliang XueInstitute of Herbgenomics, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, 611137, China.
Xiang SunInstitute of Herbgenomics, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, 611137, China.
Zhuangyuan XieInstitute of Herbgenomics, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, 611137, China.
Liping ChenInstitute of Herbgenomics, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, 611137, China.
Fan LiInstitute of Herbgenomics, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, 611137, China.
Ruolan DuInstitute of Herbgenomics, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, 611137, China.
Jingwei ZhouInstitute of Herbgenomics, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, 611137, China.
Ting WangInstitute of Herbgenomics, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, 611137, China.
Liang LengInstitute of Herbgenomics, Chengdu University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Chengdu, 611137, China. lling@cdutcm.edu.cn.
Shengpeng WangState Key Laboratory of Quality Research in Chinese Medicine, Institute of Chinese Medical Sciences, University of Macau, Macao, 999078, China. swang@um.edu.mo.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8997-456X

Funding

Health@InnoHK Initiative Fund ITC RC/IHK/4/7Science and Technology Development Fund, Macao SAR 001/2023/ALCScience and Technology Development Fund, Macao SAR 0045/2024/AGJ
6 · The paper itself

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

PMID41057911
PMCPMC12502377

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.