Article in BioMed research international, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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.
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
8 authors.
Jayasri Gokila MadhanDepartment of Biotechnology, Faculty of Biomedical Sciences and Technology, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research, Chennai, India, sriramachandra.edu.in.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-4957-0121
Surya SekaranDepartment of Biotechnology, Faculty of Biomedical Sciences and Technology, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research, Chennai, India, sriramachandra.edu.in.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-9141-2997
Rajeswari Nambirajan AkshayaDepartment of Biotechnology, Faculty of Biomedical Sciences and Technology, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research, Chennai, India, sriramachandra.edu.in.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-1572-8412
Khavyanjali VenkatesanDepartment of Biotechnology, Faculty of Biomedical Sciences and Technology, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research, Chennai, India, sriramachandra.edu.in.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0004-4842-3288
Kavin KirupanandasamyDepartment of Biotechnology, Faculty of Biomedical Sciences and Technology, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research, Chennai, India, sriramachandra.edu.in.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-5519-7961
Kiruthika VijayakumarDepartment of Biotechnology, Faculty of Biomedical Sciences and Technology, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research, Chennai, India, sriramachandra.edu.in.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-7156-0331
Nancy JeniferDepartment of Biotechnology, Faculty of Biomedical Sciences and Technology, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research, Chennai, India, sriramachandra.edu.in.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5008-9715
Benedict Christopher PaulDepartment of Biotechnology, Faculty of Biomedical Sciences and Technology, Sri Ramachandra Institute of Higher Education and Research, Chennai, India, sriramachandra.edu.in.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3089-3412
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
6 · The paper itself
Abstract
Breast cancer, particularly estrogen receptor-positive subtypes, is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Aromatase inhibitors, which target estrogen biosynthesis, are a cornerstone of therapeutic intervention.
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.
Evaluation of Ginsenosides and Their Derivatives From · full record | OpenQuestion