ArticleInternational journal of clinical pediatric dentistry2025
Comparative
Article in International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim and background: Long-term use of chlorhexidine as an antibacterial mouthwash has been associated with several adverse effects. 80% of the population in developing countries relies on traditional medicines and natural products to meet their primary healthcare needs. This study aimed to evaluate the antibacterial efficacy of herbal extracts and to compare their effectiveness with that of 0.2% chlorhexidine mouth rinse. Methods: The herbal extracts used were Results: Chlorhexidine exhibited the highest antibacterial activity, followed by tulsi, triphala, and aloe vera. The mean inhibition zone diameters (in mm) were 22.33 ± 0.8, 11 ± 0.603, 8.6 ± 0.77, and 8 ± 0.6, respectively.Intergroup comparison revealed statistically significant differences ( Conclusion: Within the limitations of this Clinical significance: As the plant extracts demonstrated a notable efficacy in inhibiting the proliferation of oral bacteria, this suggests that these extracts could be formulated into an herbal antibacterial mouth rinse option suitable for individuals seeking herbal alternatives. How to cite this article: Singh D, Rao A, Saralaya V,
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.