ArticleScientific reports2025
Phytochemical screening and evaluating in vitro antibacterial and antifungal activity of 80% methanolic Impatiens rothii root extract.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Gypenosides as a potential bacteriostatic agent against Escherichia coli: dual mechanistic insights from host target network analysis and in vitro validation.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
- Anti-inflammatory and anti-bacterial potentials of Caryota mitis L. leaves extract in urothelial LPS-induced inflammation and UTI pathogens.Archives of microbiology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Infectious diseases result in morbidity and mortality. The demand for medicinal plants is increasing worldwide due to antimicrobial resistance. The objective of this study was to test the plant chemicals and evaluate the antibacterial and antifungal activity of an 80% methanolic Impatiens rothii root extract. The cold maceration method was employed to obtain the crude extract from the roots of Impatiens rothii. The diameter of the inhibition zone was determined by agar well diffusion, and the minimum inhibitory concentration was determined by broth microdilution. As standard drugs, ciprofloxacin and amphotericin B were used, while dimethylsulfoxide was used as a negative control. Various alkaloids, glycosides, free anthraquinones, saponins, and terpenoids were detected. Staphylococcus epidermis (MIC = 4 mg/ml, MBC = 32), Salmonella typhimurium (MIC = 3 mg/ml, MBC = 16), and Escherichia coli (MIC = 4 mg/ml, 32) were inhibited. Above 32 mg/ml, neither high nor low doses of the extract suppressed the growth of Staphylococcus aureus, Enterococcus faecalis, or Klebsiella pneumoniae. Similarly, Trichophyton rubrum and Trichophyton mentagrophytes were susceptible to the crude extract of Impatiens rothii. While the least antifungal activity was observed against Candida albicans and Aspergillus niger, with an MIC value of greater than 64 mg/ml. Therefore, this study supports the traditional uses of Impatiens rothii.
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.