ArticleThe journal of pediatric pharmacology and therapeutics : JPPT : the official journal of PPAG2025
Clinical Uses of Nigella Sativa in Pediatrics: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
Article in The journal of pediatric pharmacology and therapeutics : JPPT : the official journal of PPAG, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objective
methodsThe search was conducted across 4 databases, including PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane, up to September 6, 2023, and included clinical trials using NS in pediatrics. A methodological quality assessment was performed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials (Rob 2). A meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate safety. The systematic review follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.
resultsTwo hundred sixty-five studies were screened for eligibility, including 125 papers from Scopus, 31 from PubMed, 37 from Cochrane, and 72 from the Web of Science. Sixty-eight duplicate papers were eliminated, and 185 studies were excluded. Three studies were added from snowballing. Fifteen clinical trial studies were included in this review. Limited studies have been conducted on NS in pediatrics. Based on the meta-analysis, no statistically significant side effects have occurred. Different doses and forms of NS were used, and most studies have reported improvements in the outcomes.
conclusionMore high-quality studies are needed to establish the efficacy of using NS in different diseases, along with its effective dose and form. The studies in this review report no severe adverse effects and no statistically significant occurrence of side effects. However, further studies are needed to fully understand the safety of using NS in pediatrics.
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.